UV;-NHLF 


^B    lOfl    flflt, 


TTHE  Christ  of 
Ancient  Times 


HUOO   RADAU 


muxM 

^3 

i 

^^B 

^mk. 

^g 

^P 

n^^^> 

If^m 

{ 

! 

m 

-THE- 

-JOHN  -FRYER- 
CHINESE- LIBRARY- 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/belchristofancieOOradarich 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  AN(;iENT .. 

TIMES       CAiJvOi'UM 


HUGO  RADAU 


CHICAGO 
THE  OPEN  COURT  PUBLISHING  COMPANY. 

LONDON   AGENTS 

KEGAN   PAUL,  TRENCH,  TRUBNER   &  CO.,   LTD. 

1908 


(S(R. 


/as 


MAIN  UBRARY 
JOHW  FRYER 
CHINESE  LIBRARY 

COPYRIGHT   BY 

THE  OPEN  COURT  PUB.  CO. 
1903 


PREFACE. 

THE  following  pages  herewith  issued  in  book  form 
have  appeared  in  The  Monist,  as  early  as  October, 
1903,  pp.  67-119.  At  first  it  was  my  intention  to  issue 
together  with  them  another  paper  entitled  "The  Baby- 
lonian Trinity,  the  Prototype  of  the  Christian,"  but  I  have 
decided,  upon  the  request  of  other  scholars,  to  issue  them 
now  and  wait  with  my  other  article  till  I  have  made  acces- 
sible to  the  learned  world  a  very  small  fraction  at  least 
of  the  immeasurably  rich  material  of  the  Temple  Library 
of  Nippur,  the  discovery  of  which  will  always  remain  a 
monument  to  the  immortal  fame  of  Prof.  Dr.  H.  V.  Hil- 
precht. 

At  present  I  am  engaged  in  copying  and  translating 
some  of  the  oldest  religious  texts  found  in  the  Temple 
Library  of  Nippur.  To  my  great  surprise  these  texts  more 
than  corroborate  my  contention  that  the  Babylonian  re- 
ligion is  a  purely  monotheistic  religion,  more  particularly 
a  monotheistic  trinitarian  religion,  patterned  after  the  Nip- 
purian  prototype  Enlil  ("Father"),  Errish  (or  NIN-IB, 
"Son"),  Ninlil  ("Mother"),  which  Trinity  in  Unity  is 
represented  in  the  Old  Testament  by  Yahveh  (or  Elohim, 
"Father"),  MaVak  Yahveh  (or  ''Angel  of  the  Lord;' 
"Son"),  Rnach  ("Spirit,"  "Mother")  and  in  the  New 
Testament  by  ''Father''  "Son,"  "Holy  Spirit,"  and  in  my 
forthcoming  volume  I  shall  take  the  liberty  to  refer  re- 
peatedly to  these  pages. 

It  is  to  be  expected  that  in  the  course  of  five  years 


751594 


IV  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Assyriological  science  has  made  some  progress,  but  though 
this  is  the  case,  I  do  not  see  that  it  has  in  the  least  affected 
a  modification  of  any  of  my  contentions  here. 

In  issuing  these  pages  it  is  my  hope  that  the  prospective 
readers  will  see  in  the  Christian  Religion,  as  I  do,  the 
glorious  culmination  of  the  wisdom  and  faith  of  ages  past. 
The  "Light  that  lightens  the  world''  said  of  himself,  "be- 
fore Abraham  was  I  was." — He  was  and  existed  and  was 
worshiped  as  "Son  of  the  God  of  Heaven  and  Earth"  under 
various  names  as  early  as  7000  B.  C,  when  the  mono- 
theistic trinitarian  religion  of  Babylonia  was  systematized. 

Hugo  Radau. 
Philadelphia,  Pa.,  March,  1908. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

I.  THE  BABYLONIAN   PANTHEON. 

PAGE 

The  Genealogies  of  Ishtar  and  Ntisku  and  Their  Difficulties i 

Three  Epochs  of  Babylonian  Religion 4 

Identification  of  Enlil,  Marduk  and  Anshar 6 

Solution  of  the  Difficulty 8 

Corroborations 14 

Contradictions  Reconciled 19 

Corollaries  of  the  Solution 22 

Summaries  of   Results 29 

II.  THE  ESSENTIAL  DOCTRINE  OF  BABYLONIAN  RELIGION. 

The  Belief  in  Resurrection 31 

Details 33 

Origin  of  the  Doctrine  of  Resurrection 38 

Wedding  Festivals  of  the  Gods 42 

The  Resurrection  of  Christ 49 


I.  THE  BABYLONIAN  PANTHEON. 

THE  GENEALOGIES  OF  ISHTAR  AND  NUSKU  AND  THEIR 
DIFFICULTIES. 

IT  is  admitted  by  every  one  who  has  studied  the  religion  of  the 
Babylonians,  that  it  is  from  the  first  to  the  last  polytheistic.  If 
we  were  to  take  the  trouble  of  counting  together  the  Babylonian 
divinities  occurring  in  the  inscriptions  and  especially  in  the  several 
'* lists  of  gods,"  we  would  get  nearly  as  many  as  500-1000  different 
gods.  This  state  of  affairs  is  indeed  annoying  for  one  who  tries  to 
understand  such  a  ''theological  system."  The  difficulty  is,  how- 
ever, still  more  increased,  not  only  by  the  various  identifications  of 
one  god  with  another,  but  especially  by  the  so-called  different  gene- 
alogies  of  one  and  the  same  divinity.  Take,  e.  g. ,  the  goddess  ishtar! 
She  appears  in  one  inscription  as  the  daughter  of  the  moon-god. 
Sin  ;  1  in  another  as  that  of  the  god  Afiu,'^  in  a  third  as  a  child  of  An- 
shar  or  Ashshur,^  in  a  fourth  as  that  of  Bel^^  in  a  fifth  as  a  child  of 
Nin-iby^  thviS  being  considered  not  only  as  a  daughter  of  Bel,  but  also 

^ii"  Ishtar  (SUCH)  mdrat  (dumu-sal)  ^^^  Sin  (ESH),  Ishtar's  descent,  Keilin- 
schriftliche  Btbliothek  (=K.  B.)  VI^  p.  80,  2  et  fassim. 

2  illik  mdrat  Anim  ana  fdn  Bel  abtsha  =  the  daughter  of  Anu  went  to  BSl 
her  father.     IV.  R.  65,  col.  II.  32;  Jensen,  Kosmologie,  p.  273. 

^  Anshar  (=  Ashshur). . .  .ba-nu-ii  ildniP^  mu-al-lid  ^^^ Tsh-tar  =  Anshar,  the 
creator  of  the  gods,  the  begetter  of  Ishtar.  Craig,  Religious  Texts,  Vol.  I.  p.  32,  16. 

*  See  note  2  above. 

^  As  such  she  is  known  under  the  name  E-gl-a,  which  means,  according  to 
Haupt,  S.  A.  K.  T.  p.  214,  11  ^=  kal-la-a-tu  =^  " hr'iAe.**  A-gl-a  dumu-sag  '^^^srir 
IB-A:  Reisner,  Hymnen,  pp.  132,  44:  79,  14;  56,  10;  IV.  R.  21,  No.  2,  Rev.  54; 
Craig,  R.  T.,  I.  p.  20,  28  is  therefore  translated  by  :  kal-lat  mar-tum  resh-ti-tum 
sha  ^'^ Nin-[ib'\t  i.  e.,  "the  bride,  the  principal  daughter  of  Ninib,"  Reisner,  loc. 
cit.,  p.  65,  13.     This  latter  passage  proves  also  <i**^srir  JB-A  is  =^i** Nin-ib,   who 


2  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

as  a  daughter  of  the  first-born  of  Bel,  for  Ninib  himself  is  a  son  of 
Bei.-^  Furthermore,  the  divinity  ^i^SUCH  is  not  only  =Ishtar,2 
ibiut  also  i=t:' Ninib  himself,^  nay,  even  =<i^^£^^^ Lugal-banda,^  the  god 
of  Eshnunna,  and  husband  of  ^^^si''' Nun-sun,  his  wife.  Ishtar  is 
also  ^An-ium,  the  wife  of  Anu,^  and  as  such  =^i»Nin-shar,^  who 
again  is  the  '* thunderbolt  carrier  of  Nin-Girsu,''"*  or  of  the  ^-kur.^ 
Yes,  Ishtar  has  become  even  a  common  name  for  '* goddess,"  and 
suffered  to  have  a  plural  form  "Ishtarate"  =  goddesses.^  Not  very 
much  better  is  it  with  god  nusku  (PA-|-KU).  In  one  and  the 
same  sentence,  he  is  called:  "The  one  begotten  by  Anu,"  the 
^'firstborn  of  Enlil,"  the  ''sprout  of  the  ocean,"  the  ''creature  of 
the  lord  of  heaven  and  earth.  ^^ 

In  another  inscription  he  appears  as  the  "son  of  ;6-kur,"  the 
great  one,  who  like  Nannar  (the  moon-god). .  .  .busies  himself  with 

changes  again  with  «'»»«£'*> /5  in  Zimmern,  Ritualtafeln,  No.  26,  col.  III.  48,  49, 
where  dingir  jb  is  called  i\i&  gash-ru  hu-kur  *'«  Bel  {fi^s^<^BE),  i.  e.,  "the  mighty, 
the  first-born  of  Bel."  The  title  kalldtu,  "bride,"  is  not  only  borne  by  (a)  Ishtar 
but  also  by  ip)  *^^  A-a,  the  e-gt-a  rabttu,  V.  R.  65,  igb,  who  as  such  is  identified 
not  only  with  the  Ishtar  Annunit  of  Sippar,  the  wife  of  Shamash,  the  sun-god: 
V.  R.  61,  56;  40^> ;  65,  35a,  etc.,  but  even  with  Shamash  himself:  II.  R.  57,  15a; 
(c)hy  Tashmetum,  the  wife  of  Nabfl ;  IV.  R.  59,  41&;  Zimmern,  Shurfu,  II.  157: 
kal-la-tum  rabt-tum,  "  the  great  bride."  Here  Tashmetum  is  mentioned  in  close 
connection  with  ''»*  Na-na-a,  who  in  loc.  cit.  1.  156  is  directly  coupled  with  Nabfi, 
while  in  1.  197  it  is  Tashmetum  again  who  is  mentioned  with  Nabfi.  Hence  Tash- 
metum =Nan^!  (c?)  Tsarpanitmn '.  *^^  Tsar -fa-ni- turn  be-el-tum  rabt-tum  chi- 
rat  *^^ En-bi-lu-lu  ka-lat  *^^Nu-[giTn-niut'\,  i.  e.,  the  great  mistress,  the  wife  of 
Enbilulu  (=Marduk,  see  Reisner,  Hymnen,  pp.  53,  19;  46,  10:  umun  <i**^sir En- 
bi-lu-lu  dumu-sag  <^<*^sir En-ki-ge  ;  cf.  also  Reisner,  loc.  cit.,  138,  118),  the  kallat 
of  Nugimmut,  Craig,  R.  T.,  I.  p.  31,  22,  cf.  1.  16. 

^  See  preceding  note.  ^  See  p.  i,  note  i. 

MI*  R.  57&,  Rev.  35:  rf'«i'»>('»-"A-fA«)56^C// =  ditto  (i.  e..  ^^^  Nin-ib)  sha  ra- 
am-ku-ti,  i.  e.,  d^*^eir  SUCH,  when  pronounced  Tishchu,  is  the  god  Ninib  of  "the 
pouring  out,"  or  better  of    'the  washing,  cleansing,  himself"  (Jensen,  K.  B.  VI' 
p.  365)- 

*  See  my  forthcoming  article  on  Jahveh. 

^  Hence  his  daughter  and  his  wife  !  ^11.  R.  54,  No.  3,  1.  19. 

'See  my  Creation  Story,  (  =  C.  S.)  p.  44,  note  i,  and  p.  46. 

*  Reisner,  Hymnen,  pp.  137,  44  ;   134,  col.  I.  31. 

^  See  Delitzsch,  Handzvb'rterbuch,  p.  154a.  This  is  the  reason  why  Ishtar 
may  signify  almost  any  goddess. 

"^^  Nusku  shurbH  ilidti  *i^A[nim^  tamshil  abi  bukur  ^^^ B el  {=  Enlil)  tarhtt 
apst  binUt  ^^'^En-an-ki :  IV.  R^.  49  [56],  i$b,  ff.    See  Jensen,  Kosmologie,  p   273. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  3 

the  command  of  the  ''Enlilship,"  who  guardeth  the  mystery.^  In 
a  third  he  is  called  the ''son  of  the  thirtieth  day  of  the  month. ^ 
In  a  fourth  he  is  designated  ''the  great  one,  the  one  begotten  by 
Dur-an-kt."'^  He  is  identified  not  only  with  Nergal,*  the  god  of  the 
nether  world,  whose  "day  of  death"  was  celebrated  on  the  twenty- 
eighth  of  a  month, ^  but  also  with  diiisirBIL-GI,  resp.  ding:trQiSB'. 
BAR^  etc.,  etc. 

Provoking  as  such  genealogies  might  seem  at  the  first  glance, 
yet,  we  will  have  to  admit,  that  they  had,  yes,  must  have  had  and 
still  have  a  reason.  If,  therefore,  we  want  to  bring  light  into  this 
chaos,  we  cannot  do  it  by  ridiculing^  these  genealogies,  nor  by 
building  up,  first  of  all,  a  theory  of  our  own  and  then  try  to  fit  and 
force  the  different  gods  into  our  theory,^  but  we  always  and  under 
all  circumstances  must  maintain  the  accuracy  of  these  "contradic- 
tory" genealogies  and  explain  them  by  other  passages  of  the  Cunei- 
form Literature,  which  may  help  us  to  the  right  understanding  of 

^  Mdr  {dumu-ush)  E-kur  shur-bu-u  sha  ki ma  ^^^URU-Kl-ri  (=Nannar-ri!) 
. . .  .mut-tab-bil  fa-ra-ats  *^^EN-LIL-u-ti  na-tsir  pi-r\is-ti^.  Craig,  Religious 
Texts,  I  ,  p.  35,  obv.  7,  8.  Zimmern,  Keilinschriften  und  das  Alte  Testament 
(=K.  A.  T.'),  p.  416,  note  3,  wants  to  find  in  this  inscription  the  statement  that 
Nusku  is  also  the  son  of  Sin  !  The  reading  dlidishu,  which  he  finds  in  the  Rev.  1. 
6  f.,  is — at  least  according  to  Craig's  copy — not  justified  ! 

2  IV.  R2.  23.  3  f. 

*K.  3285,  Bezold,  Catalogue,  p.  520:  ^^^ P A -\-KU  shur-bu-u  i-lid-ti  Dur-an-ki. 

*  See  Cosscean  Vocabulary. 

^IV.  R.  33,  33.  From  these  latter  three  references  Jensen  (K.  B.  VP.  pp.  413 
and  466)  concludes  that  Nusku  =  Nergal,  the  former  being  the  Neumondsichel, 
the  latter  the  abnehmender  Mond, — a  conclusion  which  I  am  willing  to  accept 
with  the  following  reserve  :  Nusku  =  Nergal  is  =  SIN  or  Nin-Girsu.  As  Nin- 
Girsu  was  the  chief  messenger  of  Enlil,  so  ^^^^sir Nusku  lugh-magh  '^^^sir En-lil-lal 
(E.  B.  H.  223,  3),  i.  e.,  •'  the  exalted  ambassador  of  Enlil,"  originally  =  Nin-Girsu, 
became,  when  Sin  was  made  the  highest  god  of  the  Babylonian  pantheon,  thus  be- 
ing identified  with  Enlil  {Creation  Story,  p.  50),  his  (Sin's)  messenger.  And  as 
the  mn*'  '?]K!'?2  was  identified  with  mn**,  so  was  Nin-Girsu  with  Enlil,  and  Nusku 
or  Nergal  with  Sin, — hence  Nusku's  worship  in  the  temple  of  the  moon-god  at 
Harran,  Inscript.  of  Nabu-nd'id,  K.  B.  III^,  p.  loi,  col.  II.  18,  42.  But  the  mes- 
senger of  a  god  is  always  his  son  !  Hence  Nusku  or  Nergal,  the  messenger  of  Sin, 
had  to  become  also  his  (Sins)  son.  The  son  of  Sin  (or  ZU)  is  Shamash  (or  UD), 
thus  it  happene*d  that  Nergal  (=  Nusku)  was  said  to  be  =  Shamash,  see  Sp.  I.  131 
(Zeitschri/t fiir  Assyriologie,  VI.  p.  241)  1.  52  JBf. ;  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T^.  p.  388. 

*  As  Jensen,  K.  B.  VP.  319,  320;  Kosm.  273  does  it. 
'  As  is  done  by  Barton,  Sketch  of  Semitic  Origins. 


4  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

the  nature  of  the  god  in  question.  If  in  course  of  such  an  investi- 
gation we  come  to  understand  his  nature  and  his  essence  correctly, 
we  also  will  and  must  be  able  to  account  for  his  genealogy,  even  if 
it  were  the  most  contradictory. 

That  so  many  different  genealogies  of  one  and  the  same  god 
do  exist  in  the  religious  doctrines  of  the  Babylonians,  is,  no  doubt, 
due  to  the  various  elements  to  be  found  in  the  Babjdonian  popula- 
tion. The  little  valley  between  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates  was 
since  the  '*dawn  of  history"  the  land  which,  on  account  of  its  fer- 
tility, almost  all  the  nations  of  the  ancient  world  tried  to  possess 
and  actually  did  possess.  In  the  inscriptions  discovered  in  this 
valley  we  find  mentioned,  besides  the  specific  Semitic-Babylonian, 
also  Persian,  Aramaean,  Arabic,  Hittite,  Elamitic,  Cossaean,  Cana- 
anitish,  and  Sumerian  gods.  A  religion  of  the  Babylonians  must, 
therefore,  be  primarily  a  history  of  their  religion ;  and  if  the  inves- 
tigator ignores  such  a  historic  development,  his  results  must  be 
pronounced,  from  the  very  first,  a  failure. 

THREE  EPOCHS  OF  BABYLONIAN  RELIGION. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  give  such  a  history  of  the  Babylonian 
religion  here — the  material  so  far  accessible  to  scholars  would  pre- 
vent me  from  doing  this — but  I  want  to  show  by  a  few  examples 
that  we  are  still  able  to  bring  some  light  into  the  chaos,  if  we  study 
the  religion  historically. 

To  put  it  briefly,  we  may  say  that  the  religion  of  the  Babylo- 
nians may  be  divided  into  three  epochs : 

I.  The  Sumerian^  embodying  the  oldest  so-called  "Semitic- 
Babylonian  "  religious  elements.  What  these  latter  are  or  were,  we 
cannot  tell  as  yet.  It  would  seem,  however,  that  the  oldest  Semitic 
religious  ideas,  as  expressed  in  the  inscriptions,  were  in  all  essen- 
tials and  particulars  the  same  as  those  of  the  Sumerians,  i.  e.,  the 
so-called  Semitic-Babylonians  seem  to  have  adopted  the  Sumerian 
pantheon  *'  in  toto  "  without  any  perceptable  admixture  of  their  own. 

II.  The  Canaanitish  epoch.     This  began  at  about  3000  B.  C.^ 

'  Shortly  before  the  "kings  of  Ur  and  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  world."  The 
inscriptions  of  these  kings  distinguish  very  often  between  the  ' '  Nifpurian  Enlil  or 
Bel"  and  another,  i.  e.,  probably  Marduk  or  possibly  Dagan. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  5 

when  the  Canaanltes  invaded  Babylonia.  At  the  time  of  Hammu- 
rabi, at  about  2200  B.  C,  they  are  masters  of  the  whole  of  Baby- 
lonia. Their  own  specific  god  has  become  the  god  Kar  i$oxrjv. 
These  Canaanites  made  Babylon  their  capital.  Their  god  became 
thus  the  city-god  of  Babylon,  and  when,  in  course  of  time  the  whole 
of  Babylonia  had  been  subjugated,  the  city-god  of  Babylon  became 
the  *'god  of  Babylonia.'*  We  may  call,  therefore,  this  epoch,  also 
the  Babylonian  epoch. 

III.  The  Assyrian.  During  this  time  we  find  nearly  all  the 
characteristics,  not  only  of  the  Sumerian  but  also  of  the  Babylonian 
period,  with  this  exception,  however,  that  the  specific  god  of  the 
Assyrians  is  put  at  the  head  of  the  pantheon  and  worshipped  in  the 
royal  capital  of  the  Assyrian  kings. 

The  god  of  the  first  epoch  was  Enlil,  that  of  the  second  Amar- 
ud  or  Marduk,  that  of  the  third  An-shar,  which  name  was  read  at 
this  time  Ashshur.  As  Marduk  displaced  Enlil,  so  did  Anshar  dis- 
place Marduk.  Such  a  ^^ displacing ^""^  however,  was  only  one  in 
*^namej'''^  not  in  essence,  i.  e.,  simply  the  name  of  the  new  victori- 
ous god  was  substituted  for  that  of  the  old  conquered  god.  Thus 
it  happened  that  the  attributes,  genealogy,  court,  servants,  etc., 
etc.,  of  the  conquered  god  were  added  to  those  of  the  victorious 
god,  to  whose  glory,  power,  and  honor  they  were  thought  to  con- 
tribute greatly.  Thus  we  get  the  strange  phenomenon,  that  one 
and  the  same  god  may  have  two  genealogies,  two  different  kinds  of 
servants,  etc.  In  a  historic  investigation,  such  a  phenomenon  will 
always  have  to  be  kept  in  mind,  and  the  question  will  have  to  be 
asked  and  answered  :  What  genealogy  belongs  to  the  god  originally, 
and  what  was  transferred  to  him?  That  such  questions  can  be  an- 
swered only  by  taking  into  consideration  the  historic  development  of 
the  Babylonian  religion,  is,  of  course,  self-evident.  As  times  went 
on,  the  attempt  was  made  to  harmonise  or  better  identify  such  two 
originally  very  different  genealogies.  The  result  of  such  harmonis- 
ing or  identification  was  that,  e.  g.,  the  father  of  the  conquered  god 
was  made  to  be  the  same  as  the  father  of  the  victorious,  at  that 

^  See  also  my  remarks  with  regard  to  the  change  of  the  name  of  El-shaddai 
into  that  of  Jahveh,  Creation- Story,  p.  58. 


b  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

time  reigning,  god,  and  so  on.     The  outcome  of  such  an  attempt 
was  finally  not  merely  henotheism  but  an  almost  pure  monotheism. 

IDENTIFICATION    OF    ENLIL,   MARDUK    AND    ANSHAR   (ASHSHUR) 

Not  only,  however,  were  the  attributes  of  the  Sumerian  Enlil 
transferred  to  Marduk  resp.  Anshar  or  Ashshur,  but  even  the  very 
name  "EnHl"  became  a  title  of  these  latter  gods — a  title,  which, 
is  generally  transcribed  and  read  bel,  i.  e.,  "lord,"  but  which  still 
betrays  to  us  the  fact  that  Marduk  ^  as  well  as  Anshar  played  the 
role  of  Enlil,  nay,  were  in  all  particulars — even  with  regard  to 
their  respective  genealogies — identified  with  him.  In  a  hymn, 
written  at  the  time  of  Ashshur-ban-apal,  King  of  Assyria,  Ashshur 
is  addressed  as  follows  :  '-^ 

1.  "  The  great  one,  the  hero  of  the  gods,  the  omniscient, 

2.  "  The  esteemed  one,  the  glorious  one,  the  En-lil-lal  of  the  gods,  he 

who  determines  the  fates, 

3.  "  An-shar  (=Ashshur),  the  great  lord,  the  omniscient, 

4.  "  The  esteemed  one,  the  glorious  one,  the  En-lil-lal  oi  the  gods,  he 

who  determines  the  fates 

5.  "[  ]  An-shar,  the  powerful  one,  the  hero  of  the  gods, 

the  lord  of  the  lands." 

In  the  very  same  hymn  we  further  learn,  that  Ashshur  has  his 
abode  in  ^-char-sag-gal-kur-kur-ra,^  i.  e.,  in  the  '*  house  of  the  great 
mounain  of  the  lands,  or  in  the  ^-shar-ra,  i.  e.,  ''the  house  of  the 
totality."*  He  is  "the  creator  of  AN-NA,  the  builder  of  the  for- 
ests,"^ "the  creator  of  the  gods,  the  one  who  begot  Ishtar."^  His 
lordship  is  glorified  by  Anu,  Enlil,  Ea,  Belit-ili,  the  Igigi,  and  the 

'C.  S.  p.  69. 

2  I.  shur-bu-u  e-ttl  ildni*^'^^  mu-du-h  ka-ta-ma 

2.  kah-tii  shii-tu-qu  '^«  EN-LIL-LAL  ildni^'^^  mu-sJiim  shi-ma-a-ti 

3.  An-shar  helu  shur-bu-u  mu-du-u  ka-la-ma 

4.  kab-tu  shii-tu-qu^^^  EN-LIL-LAL  ildni^^^^  mu-shim  shi-ma-a-ti 

5.  [  '\-bi  An-shar  dan-dan-nu  e-tilildni*""^  be-el  ma-ta-a-ti. 

Craig,  Rel.  Texts.,  I.  p.  32,  1-5. 
^  [ilu  a]-shib  E-char-sag-gal-kur-kur-ra,  Craig,  loc.  cit.,  1.  8. 
*  [ilu  al-shib  E-shar-ra  An-shar  mu-shim  shtmdti^'^^ .  Craig,  loc.  cit.,  1.  10. 
^  \ilii\  ba-nu-ti  shu-ut  AN-[N]A  {!)  fa-ti-qu  chur-sha-a-ni.     Craig,  loc.  cit., 
1   15.     For  AN-NA  see  below! 

^  [z7w]  ba  nu-u  ildni  \^y^  mu-al-lid  *^^  Ish-tar.     Craig,  loc.  cit.,  \.  16. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  7 

Anunnaki  in  the  Ubshugina,  i.  e.,  the  place  or  room  of  the  assem- 
bling hand."i  Similar  are  Anshar's  titles  in  a  prayer  of  Sinache- 
rib  (?),  where  we  read  :^ 

1.  "To  Ashshur,  the  king  of  the  totality  of  the  gods,  to  him  who  begot  himself,^ 

the  father  of  the  gods, 

2.  Who  prosper  by  his  hand  in  the  abyss,*  the  kzn^  of  heaven  and  earth, 

3.  The  lord  of  all  the  gods,  to  him  who  begot*  the  Igigi  and  the  Anunnaki, 

4.  Who  built  the  heaven  of  Anu  and  the  "great  place,"  who  made  all  men,* 

5.  Who  inhabiteth  the  bright  heavens,  the  Enhl  of  the  gods,  who  determines  the 

fates, 

6.  Who  dwelleth  in  fi-shar-ra,  which  is  in  Ashshur,  the  great  lord,  his  lord." 

Not  satisfied  with  this,  the  Assyrians  went  still  a  step  farther. 
If  Anshar  be  equal  to  Enlil,  be  indeed  identical  with  him,  then,  it 
was  quite  natural  for  them  that  they  should  consider  Ninlil,  the 
wife  of  Enlil,  to  be  also  Anshar's  wife.  Sinacherib,  when  praying 
to  Anshar,  includes  in  his  supplication  also  an  address  to  the  wife 
of  Anshar,  whom  he  calls  : 

**Nin-lil,  queen  of  6-shar-ra,  wife  of  Anshar,  who  created  the 
great  gods."^ 

These  passages  will  suffice  to  prove  that  Anshar  or  Ashshur  is 
in  all  respects  the  same  as  Enlil,  whose  name  he  even  received. 

1  \iiuA^.nu  iiuEN-LIL  ii^A-a  ^^^Belit-ilt  '«"'^  u  ^^'^{Igigi  u  ^^"Anunyiaki^  shd 
An-shar  ina  Ub-sJiu-ka{!)-7ia-ki  it-ta-a' -i-du  helu  {=  en)-tis-su.  Craig,  ioc.  ci't., 
P-  34.  6,  7- 

^  I.  a-na  Aii-shar  shar  kish-shat  ildni*^"^  ba-nu-u  rani-?ii-shu  ab{=ad) 
ildni^"f^. 

2.  shd  ina  apsi  ish-mu-chu  qat-tu-ush  shar  shame'  u  zrtsitim'i[^'\ 

3.  belildni"^"^^  ka-la-ma  sha-fi-ik  <^^ Igigi  {=  V-\-  II.)  u  ^^"A-fizm-na-[ki]. 
4    fa-ti-iq  sa-mi^^^A-nim  u  ki-gal-li  e-pish  kul-lat  da-ad-me 

5.  a-shib  bu-ru-mu  ellUti^"^  ^^-^EN-LIL  ildni*^"f^  mu-shtm  sJdmdti"^"'^. 

6.  a-shib  E-shar-ra  shaki-rib  Ashshur  {=BAL-BA  TY^  beli  rabt^  beli-sliu. 

— Craig,  Ioc.  cit.,  I.,  p.  83,  1-6. 

^  Ashur  is  here  without  father  and  mother,  the  self-existing  god. 

*I.  e..  the  Anunnaki. 

^ Lit.  =  "  poured  out"  =r<?t/z^.  The  Igigi  and  the  Anunnaki  are  repeatedly 
called  the  richUt  ^^^Anim,  i.  e.,  "the  outpouring"  =  seed  of  Anu.  For  this  sig- 
nification of  rachU  see  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI^  pp.  365  ff.  513. 

*  Or  human  habitations. 

"^  ii**NIN-LTL  shar-rat  E-shar-ra  chi-rat  An-shar  ba-nit  ildni*'^"^  rabflti 
rnesh^     Craig,  Rel.   Texts.  I.,  p.  77,  10. 


8  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Both  are  ''the  father  and  god  of  the  gods,"^  the  ''king  of  the 
gods,"  "the  king  of  heaven  and  earth,"  the  "creator  of  all  man- 
kind ";2  both  have  the  same  wife  :  Nin-lil.^  We  may  make  there- 
fore the  equation : 

Anshar  =  Enlil  =  Ashshur 

Ninlil  =  Belit  =  Ishtar. 
Anshar  has  his  abode  in  ]6-char-sag-gal-kur-kur-ra  or  in  6-shar- 
ra ;  Ninlil,  his  wife,  dwells  in  ;6-shar-ra  ;  Enlil  of  the  Sumerians 
dwells  in  6-kur.  If  Anshar  and  his  wife  be  the  same  as  Enlil  and 
his  wife,  it  would  follow  that  their  respective  habitations — their 
temples,  which  here,  as  in  all  other  cases,  stand  for  a  certain  defi- 
nite cosmic  quantity — are  also  the  same,  i.  e.,  that  the  cosmic 
;fe-char-sag-gal-kur-kur-ra  or  6-shar-ra  be  =  the  cosmic  fi-kur.  If 
fi-kur,  "the  mountain-house,"  be  the  realm  of  Enlil,  and  if  En- 
lil be  the  king  of  "heaven  and  earth,"  then  6-kur  =  6-shar-ra  = 
6-char-sag-gal-kur-kur-ra  must  be  =  "heaven  and  earth"  too  !* 

SOLUTION  OF  THE  DIFFICULTY. 

When  making  the  equation  Anshar  (Ashshur)  =  Enlil,  we 
would  seem  to  be  in  straight  contradiction  not  only  to  Damascius, 
but  also  to  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic. 

Damascius^  informs  us  that  Tauthe  (=:Tiamat),  the  mother 
of  the  gods,  and  Apason  (=Apsu)  begot  i.  Moiimis  (=Mummu); 
2.  Lache  (=  Lachamu)  and  Lachos  (=Lachmu);  and  3.  Kissare 
(=Kishar)  and  Assoros  {■=  Anshar).  By  the  latter  two  were  born 
Anos  (=Anu),  Illinos  (=  Enlil),  and  Aos  (=Ea).  Damascius's 
authority  for  this  statement  is  generally  supposed  to  be  the  first 
tablet  of  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic,  from  which  we  learn,  that 
Tiamat  and  Apsu,  "when  their  waters  in  one  joined  themselves  to- 

^  Thus  the  ah-ba  dingir  dingir-ru-ne  in  E.  B.  H.  p.  97,  and  C  S.  p.  19,  9, 
ought  to  be  translated. 

^  For  these  attributes  in  connection  with  Enlil  see  my  Creation  Story,  p.  19  f . 

^  Just  as  Enlil  became  a  title,  viz.,  bei=loTd,  so  Ninlil  became  at  this  time  = 
beh't  =  mistress  — an  attribute  borne  chiefly  by  Ishtar,  who  therefore  appears  in 
most  cases  as  the  wife  of  Ashshur. 

*  This  against  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  194 ;  K.  B.  VI^  pp.  50,  41 ;  369,  who  thinks 
that  E-kur,  etc.,  be  =  earth  ! 

^Zimmern,  K.  A.  T.^  p.  490;  Cams,  Momst,  XI.,  p.  405. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  9 

together,"  brought  forth  Lach-mu  and  La-cha-mu,  and  later  on 
also  (?)  An-shar  and  Ki-shar.  A  long  time  after  these  latter  two 
there  were  born  also  Anu,  Enlil,  and  Nugimmut  (=  Ea).  If  we 
compare  these  two  accounts  we  find,  that  Moiimis  (=Mummu^)  is 
not  mentioned  at  all  in  the  beginning  of  the  Babylonian  Creation 
Epic.  Later  on  he  is  introduced  quite  abruptly  and  seems  to  have 
been  a  ''son  of  Apsu."^  in  the  newly-discovered  fragments  of  this 
very  same  Epic^  Mummu  appears  as  a  messenger  (!)*  of  Apsu, 
which  latter,  together  with  his  wife,  Tiamat,  and  Mummu  enters 
into  a  conspiracy  against  the  newly-created  gods,  who  had  by  their 
"action"  disturbed  him.  Ea  hears  of  this  conspiracy  and  puts — 
it  would  seem — an  end  to  Apsu  and  Mummu. ^ 

But  how  could  Damascius  possibly  put  Mummu  before  Lachmu 
and  Lachamu,  seeing  that  the  first  tablet  of  the  Creation  Epic  can- 
not have  been  in  this  respect  his  authority? 

In  order  to  explain  this  we  shall  have  to  consider  somewhat 
more  fully  Damascius's  statement  as  well  as  that  of  the  first  tablet 
of  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic.     We  begin  with  : 

A.     MUMMU. 

The  Babylonian  Mummu  was  correctly  recognised  to  be  the 
prototype  of  the  Greek  Mwv/Ats  (Moiimis) — an  attribute  not  only  of 
Tiamat,^  but  also  of  god  Ea.'^   The  god  Ea  is  the  Sumerian  En-KI, 

^  Mummu  appears  there  only  as  an  attribute  of  Tiamat,  K.  B.  VI^.  p.  2,  4. 

^K.  B.  VI^  p.  4,  17.  According  to  Damascius,  however,  he  is  undoubtedly  a 
son  of  Apsil  and  Tiamat :  ff  o)v  fzovoyev?}  (!)  TraiSa  yewij&jjvai  rbv  Muvfuv.  K.  A.  T.^ 
p.  490.     Notice  the  fiovoyev?)  (!)  =only  begotten  ! 

'  King,   T/ie  Seve?t  Tablets  of  Creation,  Vols.  I.  and  II. 

*  I.  e.,  the  son  I     Cf.  Nin-Girsu  and  Enlil,  Nusku  or  Nergal  and  Sin,  etc. 

5  According  to  these  new  facts,  brought  out  by  Mr.  King's  book,  we  would 
have  to  distinguish  two  "fights"  in  the  Creation  Epic:  (i)  That  of  Ea  against 
Apsii  and  Mummu.  (2)  That  of  Marduk  against  Tiamat.  The  result  of  both  these 
*  fights  "  is  the  same  :  Apsu  and  Mummu  as  well  as  Tiimat  are  done  away  with, 
are  conquered  and  killed.  And  because  Apsd  and  Mummu  were  killed  by  Ea  be- 
fore Marduk  entered  the  field  of  battle,  we  may  see  in  this  the  reason  why  Qingu, 
who  takes  the  place  of  Apsu,  plays  such  a  significant  role  in  the  Epic,  and  why 
Mummu  is  not  mentioned  at  all  in  the  first  tablet. 

^  K.  B.  VI^  p.  2,  4 ;  Carus,  loc.  cit.,  p.  409  :  niu-um-niu  ti-amat  mu-al-li-da- 
at  gi-im-ri-shu-un. 

'  Merodach-Baladan-stone  {Beitrage  zur  Assyriologie,  II   p.  261),  col.  III.  5: 


lO  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

i.  e.,  "Mr."i  KI,  and  as»such  the  *'god  of  the  terrestrial  ocean." 
On  another  place ^  I  have  shown  that  "Mr."  KI  was  a  brother  of 
AN,  *'the  heavenly  ocean."  Mr.  KI's  mother  is  said  to  have  been 
rft«^z>(9C/'^  =  the  primeval  ocean  or  Tiamat ;  hence,  if  dtngirQjjii  be 
the  mother  of  Mr.  KI,  she  also  must  have  been  the  mother  of  Mr. 
AN.  At  the  time  when  I  wrote  my  Creation-Story,  I  was  not  aware 
of  the  fact  that  there  was  to  be  found  in  the  cuneiform  literature 
an  excellent  corroboration  of  this  statement.  While  studying  Jen- 
sen's Kosmologie  I  found  that  he  already  had  mentioned  two  pas- 
sages' in  which  dingirQur  is  called  the  dimirdm-u-tu-AN-KI^  which 
name  can  be  translated,  however,  oaly  by  **the  mother  that  brings 
forth  AN  and  KI,"  and  not,  as  Jensen  does,  *'the  mother  that  brings 
forth  heaven  and  earth,"  for  if  dinsirQjjR  be  the  mother  of  Mr.  KI, 
and  if  Mr.  KI  be  **the  terrestrial  ocean,"  it  follows,  that  KI  in  the 
name  dingir^fn-U-tu-AN-KI  cannot  mean  *' earth. "  And  if  KI  means 
"the  terrestrial  ocean,"  then  AN  must  mean  "the  heavenly  ocean," 
who  is  a  brother  (achu)  and  as  such  opposed  to  (an  achu)  the  ter- 
restrial one.  This  name  also  proves  that  according  to  the  Sumer- 
ian  conception,  upon  which  Genesis  i.  is  based,  the  world  was  not 
created  but  generated^  that  we  have  to  see  indeed  in  Genesis  i.  a 
mibin  (Toledoth),  a  ^^ generation^'  of  heaven  and  earth,  a  cosmogony^ 
which  cosmogony  in  Sumerian  is  at  the  same  time  a  theogony  ! 

Mr.  KI  or  Ea,  the  god  of  the  terrestrial  ocean,  was  considered 
to  be  the  father  not  only  of  the  "produce  of  the  sea,"  but  also  of  the 
"produce  of  the  earth, "^ — he,  therefore,  is  called  the  mum7nu  or 
ocean,^  that  builds,  creates,  produces  {ba-an)  everything  (ka-la^.^ 

{^f*E-a )  mu-um-mu  ba-an  ka-la.     Marduk.  the  son  of  Ea,  is  called  (Craig 

Rel.  Texts,  I.  p.  31,  23)  =Tndr  tnu-um-me,  i.  e. ,  the  son  of  mumme. 

*  "  Mr."  =  ^w  is  used  here  in  opposition  to  "  Mrs.  '  =  wz'w,  i.  e.,  en  is  the  hus- 
band and  nin  is  the  wife.  The  translation  "  lord  "  for  en  and  "mistress"  for  nin 
does  not  give  in  this  particular  case  the  correct  and  intended  meaning.  In  other 
words  ;  en  =  lord  is  the  sensus  litter ce,  while  en  =  Mr.  is  the  sensus  litter alis. 

2  Creation- Story,  p.  33  £f. ;  Monist,  XII.  p.  600. 

3  11.  R.  54.  No.  3,  18;  III.  R.  No.  I.  25-26. 

*  Creation- Story,  p.  37;  Monist,  Xll.  p.  604. 

*Sicl  Against,  Jensen,  K.  B.  "VT.  p.  303:  "Form."  See  also  Delitzsch, 
Handzvdrterbuch,  p.  41 5&.  Marduk,  the  mdr  mu-um-me  is  therefore  the  same  as 
Marduk  mdr  apst. 

®  See  above,  p.  9,  note  7. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  II 

Damascius,  when  explaining  the  name  Moiimis,  calls  him  a 
V077TOS  Kocr/Aos,  which  is  generally  translated  by  "intelligible  world. "^ 
The  word  for  ''cosmos"  in  Sumerian  is  AN-KI.  Hence  Moiimis  = 
Mummu  =  ocean  must  have  consisted  of  an  AN  and  a  KL,  i.  e.,  of 
something  that  is  "above"  and  "below.'*  Moiimis,  then,  was  the 
ocean  that  was  "  above  and  below" — but  this  he  was  not  as  yet  in 
fact,  in  reality,  but  only  in  mind  (^vorjro^  !).  Hence  Mummu  =  Moii- 
mis must  have  been  the  "heavenly  and  the  terrestrial  ocean"  be- 
fore the  actual  separation  or  better  differentiation  took  place,  i.  e., 
before  he  was  considered  by  the  Babylonians  as  consisting  of  two 
brothers  {achu),  who  at  the  same  time  were  opposed  to  each  other 
{achu).'^  Furthermore,  Damascius  calls  Moiimis  the  "/uiovoye/>ti}(!) 
TTtttSa,"  the  only  begotten  son  of  Apason  and  Tauthe  !  If,  therefore, 
Moiimis  be  a  vo-qros  Koorfxo^,  an  ocean  consisting  "in  mind"  of  an 
AN  and  a  KI,  of  an  "upper  and  lower"  part,  and  if  dingirQjjR  be 
"the  mother  that  brought  forth  the  upper  {an^  and  the  lower  {ki^ 
ocean,"  and  if  the  upper  part  became  god  AN  and  the  lower  part 
god  KI,  then  Moiimis  must  be  the  common  name  for  god  AN  and 
god  KI  before  they  had  been  differentiated.  This  god  An  and  this 
god  KI  were — before  their  differentiation — "the  only  begotten''  oi 
Apsii  and  Tiamat,  hence  if  Damascius  says,^  that  out  of  Tauthe  and 
Apason  be  born  also  "another"  generation,  viz.,  Lache  and  Lachos, 
he  contradicts  himself/  This  contradictory  statement  of  Damascius, 
has  led,  it  is  strange  to  notice,  nearly  all  translators,  even  Profes- 
sor Jensen,  to  translate  lines  g-io  of  the  first  tablet  of  the  Epic  as 
follows:  (When  Apsu  and  Tiamat  their  waters  in  one  had  joined 

together)  9  "da  wurden  die  Gotter  gebildet  [ ],  ro,  da  ent- 

standen  \_zuerst']  Lachmu  und  Lachamu."*  Having  recognised  the 
contradiction  in  Damascius's  statement,  we  have  to  separate  line 
10  from  line  9  by  a  "period  "  and  begin  a  new  sentence  !  Trans- 
late :   "When. .  .  .then  the  gods  were  created.     Lachmu  and  Lach- 

'  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T^.  p.  490 ;  Carus,  Monist,  XI.  p.  406  f. 
2  See  Creation- Story,  pp.  34,  64;  Monist,  XII.  p.  601. 

'  K.  A.  T^.  p.  490  :  £/c  61  ruv  avrav  (i.  e.,  Tauthe  and  Apason)  d^A^yv  yeveav  npoel- 
^eIv,  AaxTjv  Kai  Aojov. 

*  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI^  pp.  2,  g,  10. 


12  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

amu  came  into  existence,  etc."  By  this  translation  we  are  left  in 
doubt  with  regard  to  the  parents  of  Lachmu  and  Lachamu,  who 
otherwise  are  mentioned  quite  frequently  in  the  Babylonian  Crea- 
tion Epic.  What  else  we  learn  about  Lachmu  and  Lachamu  may 
be  classified  under  the  following  heads : 

B.     LACHMU  AND  LACHAMU. 

1.  They  are  \.h.Q parents  of  An-shar,  who  therefore  is  the  son  of 
Lachmu  and  Lachamu.^ 

2.  They  are  the  parents  of  Marduk.      Marduk  becomes  thus, 
together  with  Anshar,  a  son  of  Lachmu  and  Lachamu. ^ 

3.  Tidmat  appears  as  the  enemy  of  Lachmu  and  Lachamu.^ 

4.  Lachmu  and   Lachamu  are  creators,  and   those  whom  they 
had  created  are  to  be  found  at  the  side  of  Tiamat.* 

5.  ^"^"La-cha-mi  is  one  of  the  eleven  helpers  of  and  created  by 
Tiamat.^ 

Summing    up    these    facts  we  would  have  to   distinguish — it 
seems — between  at  least  the  following  Lachmus  and  Lachamus  : 

a.  the  parents  of  Anshar  and  Marduk,  Nos.  i,  2. 

b.  the  enemies  of  Tiamat  and  creators,  Nos.  3,  4. 

c.  auvd  Lachami  as  one  of  the  eleven  helpers  of  Tiamat. 

This  confusion  is  increased,  if  we  take  into  consideration  two 
lists   of   gods,^  where  ^i^Lach-ma  and  ^^"La-cha-ma   form    one   pair 


^  K.  B.  VP.  p.  12,  1,  II  ff. :  II.  "  Go,  Gaga,  present  thyself  to  them,"  12.  "The 
command  which  I  gave  thee,  make  known  unto  them  "  :  13.  "An-shar,  your  (i.  e., 
L.  and  L.'s)  son  hath  sent  me."  Conf.  loc.  cit.,  p.  16,  67;  Carus,  Monist,  loc. 
cit  ,  p.  414,  where  it  is  recorded  that  Gaga  did  go  to  L.  and  L.,  and,  when  he  ap- 
peared before  them,  said  unto  them:  "An-shar  ma-ru-ku-nu  u-ma- i-ir-ayi-ni,'' 
i.  e.,  "Anshar,  your  son  hath  sent  me."     See,  however,  below  sub  C.  i. 

^K.  B.  VP.  p.  14,  55  ;  Carus,  loc.  cit.,  p.  414.  Anshar  dispatches  his  mes- 
senger Gaga  to  inform  L.  and  L.  that  Anu  and  Nugimmut  had  been  sent  out 
already  by  him  (i.  e.,  Anshar)  against  Tiimat — but  with  no  result.  "Whereupon 
I  (i.  e.,  Anshar)  commanded  Marduk,  the  wise  one  among  the  gods,  your  son  (to 
go  against  Tiamat)." 

^  K.  B.  VP.  pp.  16,  65;  20,  124,  125  ;  cf.  p.  12,  4,  and  see  below,  C.  3. 

*K.  B.  VP.  p.  4,  4  below;  cf.  pp.  12,  17-18;   17,  76. 

^K    B.  VII.  pp.  6,  17  (=  Carus,  loc.  cit.,  p.  411);   18.  89. 

«II.  R.  54,  No.  3,  9,  and  III.  R.  69,  No.  i,  obv.  /.  /.  14,  15. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  I  3 

among  the  ''twenty-one  who  have  An-na  for  their  parent"^  and 
where  they  are  identified  with  ^^^^A-nu-um  and  An-tum.  In  a  third 
list'-*  appears  ^^^Lach-ma  even  as  the  ^'^^^A-nu  of  the  totality  of 
heaven  and  earth.  "^ 

The  same  confusion  is  met  with 

C.     ANSHAR  AND  KISHAR. 

1.  The  first  tablet  of  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic  mentions 
Anshar  and  Kishar  after  Lachmu  and  Lachamu,  as  children  of 
whom?  of  Tiamat  and  Apsu?  or  of  Lachmu  and  Lachamu?*  Later 
on,  however,  appears  Anshar  as  the  son  of  Lachmu  and  Lachamu.^ 

2.  Anshar  is  the  father  of^^uA-ni{u)m.^ 

3.  Anshar"  sends  out  Anu  and  Nugimmut  against  Tiamat  after 
he  had  been  informed  of  her  rebellion  by  Ea.^  Anshar  appears 
here  evidently  as  the  chief  opponent,  chief  enemy  of  Tidmat.^ 

4.  Marduk,  after  having  overcome  Tiamat,  put  into  prison  her 
helpers,  taken  the  tablets  of  fate  from  Qingu,  had,  by  doing  all  this, 
** completely  established  Anshar*s  supremacy  over  the  enemy.  "^^ 
Marduk  apparently  is  here  the  champion  of  Anshar,  the  enemy  of 
Tiamat.  ^1 


^See  below.  211    r   ^^^  j^q.  4,  7. 

3  sha  kish-shat  AN-KT,  see  below  !  For  still  other  occurrences  of  ^^^Lachmu 
see,  besides  the  places  quoted  by  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  275,  also  Craig  R.  T.  I.  p.  8, 
Rev.  i:  ^'^^Lac/i{=Ts3ib\)-mu,  Craig,  ioc.  cit.,  p.  30,  37:  ^^^ Lach-me ;  Zimmern, 
Shurpu,  VIII.  19 :  ^^^La-ach-mu. 

*See  K.  B.  VI^  p.  2,  12  ;  Carus,  Ioc.  cit.,  p.  410.  According  to  this  passage, 
then,  we  are  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  parents  of  Anshar  and  Kishar  !  According  to 
Damascius,  however,  (see  K.  A.  T^.  p.  490  :  tlra  av  rpiTT/v  ck  tov  avruv  i.  e.,  Tauthe 
and  Apason,  KiaaapTj  Kal  'Aoaupov),  were  Anshar  and  Kishar,  the  sons  of  Tiimat  and 
Apsfl.  If  this  be  true,  then  Damascius  would  contradict  himself  here  again,  for  he 
expressly  told  us  that  Mummu  =  Moumis  was  the  "  only  begotten  "  son  of  Tauthe 
and  Apason  ! 

^K.  B.  Vr.  pp.  12,  13  ;  (=  Carus,  lac.  cit.,  p.  413)  ;  16,  68  (=  Carus,  lac.  cit., 
p.  414).  See  already  above,  sub  B.  i.  Also  these  passages  show  quite  clearly 
that  Damascius's  statement  cannot  be  true. 

«K.  B.  VI'.p.  10,  1,8,  10,  12.         ^K.  B.  Vr.p.  14,  53,54.         « King,  Tablet  II. 

'Cf.  above,  B.  3,  where  Lachmu  and  Lachamu  are  opposed  to  Tiimat. 

^OR.  B.  VP.  p.  28,  125  ;  Carus,  lac.  cit.,  418. 
"See  No.  3  and  cf.  B.,  No.  3. 


14  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

5.  Anshar  and "  Kishar  are  likewise  to  be  found  among  the 
*' twenty- one  who  have  An-na  for  their  parent,"  and  as  such  again 
either  =^^^A-nu-um  and  An-tum,  or  ^ii^An-num  ''of  the  totality  of 
heaven  and  earth.  "^ 

6.  An-shar  is  the  builder  of  6.-shar-ra  -^  according  to  the  fourth 
tablet  of  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic  it  is  Marduk  who  builds  it.^ 

7.  An-shar  is,  as  we  have  seen  above,  the  common  ideographic 
writing  of  the  chief-god  of  the  Assyrians :  Ashshur. 

CORROBORATIONS. 

This  confusion  throws  a  striking  light  upon  the  literary  char- 
acter of  the  Babylonian  Creation  Epic.  Taking  the  above-given 
peculiarities  into  account,  we  would  have  to  distinguish  at  least  the 
following  different  sources — each  source  being  represented  by  its 
own  specific  god,  who  at  one  time  or  another  was  the  opponent  of 
Tiamat : 

1.  Lachmu  (and  Lachamu):  B.  3.  * 

2.  Anshar :  C.  3,  4. 

3.  Marduk  :  the  whole  of  the  Creation  Epic  as  we  have  it  now. 

4.  Ashshur,  whose  name  is  only  the  Assyrian  equivalent  of  the 
Sumerian  Anshar. 

From  this  it  would  also  follow,  that  these  four  gods  were  the 
same — at  least  in  ''essence,"  if  not  in  name: 
I.   Anshar  is  =  Lachmu*  (and  Lachamu),  because  both  appear 

1 II.  R.  54,  No.  3,  6  ;  III.  R.  69,  No.  i,  obv.  8,  9  ;  II.  R.  54,  No.  4,  4. 
2K.  3445 -f-Rm.  396,  published   in    Cuneiform    Texts,  XIII.  24  f.     See  also 
Delitzsch,   Weltschdffungse^os,  No.  20,  p.  51  ff. 

^     After  the  lord  (i.  e.,  Marduk)  had  measured  the  form  (?)  of  the  ocean 

He  erected    'a  great  house"  (esh-gal-la)  like  unto  it;  (i.  e.,  like  unto  the 

ocean),  viz.,  6-shar-ra, 
'The  great  house,'  viz.,  E-shar-ra,  which  he  had  built  as  a  (or  :  to  be  a) 

sha-ma-mu 
He  caused  *^"A-num,  ^^^En-lil,  and  ''«^a  to  inhabit  as  their  city." 

K.  B.  VI^  p.  30,  144-146  (Carus,  loc.  cit.,  p.  419). 
*  Just  as  Nin-Girsu,  the  son  of  Enlil,  was  identified  with  his  father,  cf.  among 
other  arguments  also  the  name  :  6-ninnii-''»«^'''  Im-gig-ghu-bar-bar  (ninnu  =  Enlil!), 
and  as  the  'angel  of  the  Lord"  with  the  "Lord,"  so  was  Anshar,  the  son  of  L. 
and  L.  (B.  1.),  with  Lachmu,  and  ^>*A-m\u)m,  the  son  of  Anshar,  with  Anshar 
(C.  2.). 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  I5 

a.  as  the  enemy  of  Tiamat :  C.  3,  4  ;  B.  3 ; 

b.  among  the  "twenty-one  who  have  Anna  for  their  parent"; 

c.  are  identified  (a)  either  with  ^i^A-nu-um  (and  An-ium),  {ff)  or 

with  ii^A-num  ''of  the  totality  of  heaven  and  earth." 

II.  Anshar  =  Marduk  : 

a.  both  are  the  sons  of  Lachmu  (and  Lachamu)  :  B.  i;  B.  2.; 

C.  I. 

b.  both  are  the  builders  of  E-shar-ra  :   C.  6. 

c.  both  are  the  enemies  of  Tiamat ;  Anshar :  C.  3.  4 ;  Marduk : 

the  whole  Creation  Epic  in  its  present  literary  form. 

III.  Anshar  =  Ashshur  :  C.  7. 

The  role  of  Ashshur  as  creator  was  derived  from  Anshar,  or 
better:  ''Ashshur  the  creator"  can  also  be  read  "Anshar  the  crea- 
tor." Marduk  the  creator  derived  his  power  from  Enlil,  whom  he 
displaced  and  whose  name  and  attributes  he  received.  Above  we 
have  seen,  that  even  Anshar  =  Ashshur  was  completely  identified 
with,  and  even  called,  Enlil.  If  therefore  Anshar  be  =  Enlil,  and 
if  Anshar  be  also  =  Lachmu,  then  Lachmu  must  be  =  Enlil  too  ! 

Enlil  is  the  "king"  of  "heaven  and  earth,"  Anshar  as  well  as 
Lachmu  ^x^^^^^A-num  "of  (the  totality  of)  heaven  and  earth" — 
hence  if  our  identification,  Enlil  ■=  Anshar  =  Lachmu,  be  correct, 
then  Enlil  the  "king  of  heaven  and  earth"  must  he  =  ^^^Anum  "of 
(the  totality  of)  heaven  and  earth,"  i.  e.,  Enlil  =  Anum  ! 

This  result  sheds  a  new  and  unexpected  light  upon  the  hitherto 
completely  misunderstood^  three  lists  of  gods,  mentioned  above. 

For  the  sake  of  completeness  and  on  account  of  their  impor- 
tance I  may  be  permitted  to  give  them  here  in  transcription. 

LIST  I. :  II.  R.  54,  NO.  3. 
This  list  arranges  the  "twenty-one  who  have  Anna  for  their 
parent,"  in  pairs.  These  pairs  are  husband  and  wife.  The  first 
three  lines,  which  are  separated  from  the  rest,  must  contain  only 
one  out  of  the  twenty-one  names.  This  one  name  is  explained  ac- 
cording to  its  different  meanings,  which  it  may  have  when  brought 
into  relation  to  the  following  ten  pairs.     It  reads  : 

^Jensen,  Kosm.,  pp.  192  f.,  272  f.;  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T^,  p.  506. 


l6  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 


I.    i.»  AN 

2.  AN,  i.  e.,^  An-turn?-  =^ 

3.  AN-KP 


^i'^A(\f-nu{\)^-[um] 
irtsitim^  ["'«] 
iiuA-7iu  u\An-turn\ 


II.    4.    'i^^Sir  IB^ 

III.  5.  An-shar-gal^ 

IV.  6.  An-sha7'^^ 


diugir/Slin-lIB^ 

dingirKi-shar-  [  ^a/  ]  ^° 


^  The  Roman  numbers  indicate  the  "pairs."'  The  Arabic  numbers  give  the 
lines  of  the  inscription. 

'Copy  gives  for  A-nu  =  ZI,  but  wrongly. 

3  Sign  GUR  :  S^  239  =  Brunnow,  List,  No.  7315. 

*  The  sign  for  god  is  wanting  in  order  to  avoid  a  possible  misreading  :  ildm 
(=  gods  of)  Turn.     See  also  note  to  Anshargal ! 

^The  common  "sign  of  separation,"  Brunnow,  List,  No.  7757. 

«  Written  KI  [     ] .     Notice  here  that  AN  =  KI ! 

'If  K'I:=irtsitu=iAntum  =  AN,  and  if  <^»A-nu-um  be  also  =  ^A^,  then  we 
have  to  see  in  this  AN  =  the  first  ;pair  ! 

®  According  to  II.  R.  54,  No.  4  (see  below!)  IB  has  the  gloss  :  u-ra-ash,  and 
according  to  II.  R.  57,  obv.  C.  1.  31,  that  of  H-ra-dsh,  as  such  he  is  identical  with 
*i^NIN-IB  sha  ud-da-zal-li.  This  latter  passage  shows  that  we  should  read  in  each 
and  every  instance  the  god  dingir / b  res^.  dingirj\j^j]^.[B  =  diugirijyashxQ%-^.  diugir 
Nin-urash.  Zimmern,  Babylonische  Buss^salmen,  p.  50,  thinks  that  urash  be  a 
Semitism,  it  being  derived  from  ^r^5Z!M=  "entscheiden."  Not  from  eres?iu  = 
"entscheiden,"  however,  but  from  ^res/zw=  "  to  irrigate  "  (!),  Delitzsch,  H.  W.  B. 
p.  i40^>,  has  urash  "  to  be  derived,"  This  holds  true  not  only  of  the  ^^^^Ir-resh  = 
erish  in  IV.  R.  34,  516,  and  the  *^^Ir-ri-esh  ur-sag  in  Reisner,  Hymnen,  pp.  86, 
8  ;  134,  25,  26,  but  also  of  the  "Eresh  "  in  the  name  of  the  goddess  Eresh-ki-gal, 
against  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI^  p.  388,  who  takes  eresh  here  in  the  sense  of  "gewaltig  " 
Hence  dingir]\i{^.iB{-=  urash)  is  also  called  dingirEngar{-=  ereshti)  =  "  the  irriga- 
tor," as  such  he  is  the  god  of  the  **l2ivvciets"  =  ikkarti:=e?7gar!  Cf.  also  Ur- 
dit*irirNin-Girsu  =  ikkaru=iiz.rmer  (C.  S.  p.  66,  note).  This  also  proves  that 
dingir^in-Girsu  '\%-=diugirEngar  =  dingirj\j^ij^.iB  {=urash)  which  latter,  originally 
masculine,  was  identified  not  only  with  dtngtr/B  but  even  with  dtngirj^Ji^j-IB,  the 

TJuife  of  dingirJB  ! 

'  Shar  =  CHI=.  kishshatu  =  totality.  The  sign  for  ' '  god  "  =  an  is  wanting 
before  this  name,  because,  if  it  had  been  written,  one  might  read  "  dingir-dingir 
shar-gaV  and  translate  "  the  gods  of  the  great  totality."  In  order  to  avoid  such 
a  possible  reading  and  translation,  the  sign  for  "god "  was  omitted.  Cf.  also  An- 
tum  and  An-shar.     The  name  signifies  :  "  the  great  upper  totality." 

"^^  "The  great  lower  totality  " — as  such  opposed  to  the  upper  one  ! 

"  For  this  writing  instead  of  dingir An-shar ,  see  sub  An-shar-gal.  The  name 
means  =  "the  upper  totality." 

"The lower  totality." 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 


17 


V.  7.  dingir En-shar^ 

VI.   8.  di*^sir Du-urti 

VII.  9.  <ii»si^Lach-ma'^ 

VIII.     10.  dingir^.kur^ 

IX.   II.  dingirA-la-la 

X.   12.  <^'«-r'>ditto(  =  ./-/</-/.0-f^''"« 

XI.   13.  <^i^zir En-uru-td-la 

14.  ^7  €71  dm- 


dingirj^in-  \^shar\ .  2 

dtngirZ)a-[uru]^ 

dingir  la-cha-m  [a]  ^ 

dingirGd-r\a'\'^ 
dingirBe-li-l\iY' 

rfm^t>ditto(  =  Be-li-U)-alan 
dingirj^in-uru-ul-la^ 
a-a  An-na-^e{\y^ 


1  Either  Mr.  Shar  (  =  totality)  or  "lord  of  the  totality." 

2  Mrs.  Shar,  or  mistress  of  the  totality.  These  two  names  as  well  as  those  in 
1.  13  show,  that  these  pat'rs  are  husband  and  wife  ! 

^  Both  these  names  have  to  be  translated  by  "Eternal  (one)"=Hebr.  1)1, 
and  are  as  such  Semitic  names.     Cf .  also  1.  13. 

*Sign  lach  —  LUCH,  so  generally.  For  other  writings,  see  besides  note  3  above 
p.  13,  also  dingirLach-mti,  K.  B.  VP.  pp.  2,  10  [12,  4];  16,  68;  dingirLach-cha,  K. 
B.  VI^.  p.  20,  125,  and  Aa;fOf. 

^Also  written  dingirEa-cha-mu,  K.  B.  VI^  pp.  2,  10;  [12,  4];  20,  125.  dingir 
La-cha-me,  loc.  cit.,  p.  16,  68,  (In  loc.  cit.,  p.  18,  89  appears  this  name  among 
the  eleven  helpers  of  Tidmat);  h^axn.  What  these  names  mean,  is  not  yet  appar- 
ent, but  cf .  at  the  present  the  note  of  Houtsma,  Zeitschrift  fiir  alttestamentliche 
Wissenschaft ,  1902,  p.  329  ff.,  on  ^C^,  ^'"^?,  and  •*'^v''?^. 

^  "  The  god  of  E-kur."     E-kur  is  the  temple  of  dingir Ey^.m  Jq  Nippur.     Hence 

dingir E-kur  —  dingir En-lU  ! 

"^  dingir c d-r a  iot  Gar-ra=Gdl-la  =  Pi.ssyt\2in  Muallidtu="  the  one  who  brings 
forth."  For  ^^=^a7  see  Jensen,  Z.  A.  I.  192;  Strassmaier,  Syll.  154.  This  pair  is 
left  out  in  the  list  HI.  R.  69,  No.  i,  obv.,  where  instead  of  it  the  pair  AN-\-KI\s 
added. 

*For  this  reading  see  Jensen,  Kosm.,  272,  2.  She  appears  as  the  sister  of 
Tammuz,  who  is  ' '  her  only  brother  "  {a-chi  e-du)  as  well  as  ' '  the  paramour  (Buhle) 
of  her  youth"  {cha-mer  tsi-ich-ru-\ti-shd\y.  K.  B.  VI^  p.  90,  51,  55,  47.  Jensen, 
loc.  cit.,  p.  404,  thinks  it  not  impossible  that  Belilihe  =  Bulala,  the  queen  of  FA- 
AN,  mentioned  in  II.  R.  60,  27a  and  26^.  PA- AN  he  takes  to  be  a  name  for  "  the 
netherworld."  An  identification  of  Belili  with  the  Elamitic  divinity  Belala  or 
Bilala  he  does  not  venture  to  maintain. 

^  "  Lord  resp.  Mistress  of  the  eternal  city."     Cf.  1.  8. 

^''III.  R.  69,  No.  I,  obv.  22  has  :  21  en  dm-a-a  An-na-ge-ne.  Am-a-a  is  trans- 
lated in  IV.  R.  25  f .  by  a-bi  um-mi : 

25.  zi  dingir  En  dm-a-a  dingir  En-lil-lal-ge  ghe-:pad 

26.  nish  he-el  a-bi  um-mi  sha  ^^^EN-LIL  lu-u  ta-m,a-a-ta. 

27.  zi  dingir ^in  dm-a-a  dingir jYin-lil-lal-ge  ghe-pad 

28.  nish  be-el-ti  a-bi  um-m,i  sha  ^^^d\iio{  =  NIN-LIL)  lu-u  ta-ma-a-ta, 
i.  e.,  "by  Bel  resp.  Belit  the  dm-a-a  of  Enlil  resp.  Ninlil  mayest  thou  swear." 
This  shows  that  dm-a-a  may  be  applied  to  a  male  or  a  female  god.  Am-a-a  lit. 
\T2Jis\dLiedi\s=" mother-father  "  the  Assyrian  translates  it  by  "father-mother'' 


1 8  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Similar  to  the  preceding  is 

LIST  II.:    III.    R.   69,   NO.    I,   OBV., 

where  the  names  of  the  single  pairs  are  arranged — with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  second — not  side  by  side,  but  one  below  the  other.  This 
list  reads : 


I.  I. 

AN 

*i^A-nu-um 

2. 

AN 

An-tum 

II.  3- 

AN-Kn 

i^'^A-nu-um  u  (i,  e.,  and)  An-tum 

III.  4. 

dingirjB(  =  urash) 

ditto  (i.  e.,  *^^A-nu-um  u  An-tum)^ 

5- 

dingirjsfin-IB  ( =  urasJi) 

ditto 

IV.  6. 

An-shar-gal 

ditto 

7. 

dinzirfCi-shar-gal 

ditto 

V.  8. 

An-shar 

ditto 

9- 

dingir/Ci-shar 

ditto 

IV.   10. 

dingirEn-shar 

ditto 

II. 

dingirjsfin-shar 

ditto 

VII.   12. 

dingirDu-UrU 

ditto 

13- 

dingirDa-Uru 

ditto 

VIII.    14. 

dingirLach-ma 

ditto 

15- 

dingirLa-cha-ma 

ditto 

IX.   16. 

dingirA-la-la 

ditto 

17- 

dingirBe-li'li 

ditto 

(conf.  also  II.  R.  62,  21c:  AM-TU  [vihxch  has  the  gloss  a-ga-ri-in  in  V,  R.  29, 
^7g'\=a-bu  um-mu).  It  is  a  shorter  form  for  dm  tu-ud-da  and  a-a  tu-ud-da: 
IV.  R.  10,  Rev.  51,  and  corresponds  to  our  word  "parent."  The  line  in  question 
may  therefore  be  translated:  "twenty-one  of  {ge)  the  lord  (^w),  the  parent  (^m- 
a-a)  An-na  they  are  {ne)"  i.  e.,  twenty-one  who  are  of  the  lord,  the  parent  Anna  or 
who  have  Anna  for  their  parent.  If  this  translation  be  accepted,  then  AN-NA-ge 
would  be  a  genetivus  objectivus.  It  may  be,  however,  also  a  genetivus  suhjectivus. 
In  this  latter  case  the  twenty-one  would  be = the  "  parent  AN-NA" — thus  leaving 
us  in  doubt  with  regard  to  the  ' '  parentship "  of  these  twenty-one  gods.  If  the 
AN-NA-ge  be  construed  as  a  gent,  subj.,  the  translation  would  be:  twenty-one 
(sc.  names)  of  (=for)  the  lord,  the  parent  AN-NA  (they  are).  Bat  whatever  trans- 
lation we  accept — the  result  remains  the  same  ! 

*  This  pair  is  not  found  in  the  above-given  list,  for  there  an-ki  is  used  as  a 
kind  of  introductory  explanation  not  only  to  all  the  following  pairs,  but  also  to  the 
pair -<4A^.'  An-ki  here  takes  the  place  of '''"^''^-Awr  and '^»«^»*6^<f-ra  of  the  pre- 
ceding list. 

2  We  would  expect  that  dingir/B  would  he=*^**An'nu-um  only,  but  not  so  here. 
Cf.  for  th^  present  here  <'»'''f'''i5'w-///=king  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  dingirj^in-hi. 
also  =  queen  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  see  below,  p.  29,  note  i. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 


19 


X.   18.  dingir^xi\,o{  =  A-la-laY-alan 

ditto 

19.  rf'«^>ditto  {  =  Be-lz-li)-alan 

ditto 

XI.   20.  ^i^^sir En-uru-ul-la 

ditto 

2 1 .  f^i^sir JSfin-uru-ul-la 

ditto 

22.  21  {V)  en  dm-a-a 

An-na-ge-ne 

LIST  III.:  II.  R.  54,  NO.  4, 
gives  us  the  names  of  the  '* husbands"  only.     It  reads 


I. 

[ 

]  AN 

iiuA 

■mi-um 

2. 

[                                          dingir^    {u.ra 

-ashflB 

•■'"ditto  {  =  A 

-nu- 

um)   sha  ish-shim  ik- 

ri-bP 

3. 

[             A\n-shar-gal 

''«ditto(  =  ^- 

nu-um)  sha  kish-shat 

AN-KI^ 

4- 

[A]n-skar 

,v«^. 

■mi  (chi.bif  ditto  {  —  sha  kish-shat 

AN-KI) 

5. 

\dinyirEn-shar 

tV» 

ditto 

6. 

dingir  £)-ll.UrU 

ilu 

ditto 

7- 

dingir  EdCh-ma 

ilu 

ditto 

8. 

dingirE-kur 

ilu 

ditto 

9- 

dingirA-ia-^^ 

ilu 

[ditto 

10. 

rf^^^vditto  {  =  A-la-la)-alan 

ilu 

[ 

ditto 

II. 

dingirEn-uru-ul-la 

ilu 

ditto 

CONTRADICTIONS  RECONCILED. 

Looking  over  these  three  lists  we  will  have  to  admit  that  the 
*  husbands"  as  well  as  the  *^  wives''  are  the  same  ^^ among  them- 
selves,'' for  they  are  identified  either  with  Anum  resp.  Antum  or 
with  Anum  *^of  the  totality  of  heaven  and  earth.'*  If  we  succeed  in 
identifying  one  .husband  resp.  wife  correctly — we  ipso  facto  did  it 
with  all. 

A  good  starting-point  is,  no  doubt,  ding:tr_^.kury  i.  e.,  *'the  god 

'  This  writing  shows  that  we  have  here  also  an  arrangement  according  to  fairs 
— or  else  the  "ditto"  in  lines  18  and  19  would  have  to  be  referred  to  line  17 — an 
hypothesis  which  is  forbidden  by  the  first  list !     Cf.  List  I.,  lines  11  and  12. 

2  u-ra-ash  is  the  gloss  to  IB,  giving  its  pronunciation.     See  p.  18,  note  2. 

'I.  e.,  "Anu  who  hears  prayers."    See  also  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  194  and  note  i. 

*  I.  e. ,  Anu  of  the  totality  of  heaven  and  earth. 

5  chi-M="  is  broken,  damaged  " — shows  that  the  original  from  which  this  copy 
has  been  made,  was  unreadable  here — the  sign  ''um  "  probably  having  been  broken 
away. 


20  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

of  6-kur."  fi-kur  is  the  temple  of  Enlil — hence  '*the  god  of  6-kur" 
can  be  only  Enlil.  And  if  dingir^.^ur  be  =  ^i^sir Enlil,  then  his  wife 
dingir Qd-ra  Hiust  be  dingirj^inlil.     We  are  justified  in  saying  : 

The  ^^  twenty -one  who  have  Anna  for  their  parent '"  are  nothing 
more  nor  less  than  twenty-one  different  names  (!)  of  god  LIL  ^'the 
king  of  heaven  and  earth,'' "^  the  son  of  AN  or  ''heavenly  ocean" — of 
god  LIL  considered  either 

a.  as  a  whole  =  AN'^  =  LIL  =  r-pi  (firmament)  =  "heaven  and 

earth  "  =  ««-{-  an  or  an  -\-  ki  =  Anum  -f-  Antum. 

b.  or  as  consisting  of  a  male  or  female,  i.  e.,  of  husband  and 

wife  :  En-YA  -|-  Nin-\\\  =  ^«-shar  -j-  JVin-sh.a.r  =  ^«-shar-gal 
-f-  JVin-shar-gal  =  ^^^-uru-ul-la  -|-  iV/«-uru-ul-la  =  Anum  -j- 
Antutn.^ 

c.  or  as   "brother  and   sister"   (i.  e.,  achu -\- achatu)  \  En-///-f 

Nin-///=  Y.n-shar  -\-  '^m.-shar  =  'En-shar-gal  -|-  '^in-shar-gai 
=  ^n-uru-ul-la  -\-  Win-uru-ul-la.^ 

d.  or  as  "opposed  to  each  other"  (i.  e.,  as  achu  and  achitu)-.^ 

AN-{-  KI=zAn-sh.diX  -\-  ^/-shar  =  ^«-shar-gal  -f  ^/-shar-gaL 
Although  we  have  only  twenty-one  (!)  names,  yet  we  are  sup- 
posed to  have,  according  to  the  arrangement  of  the  lists,  eleven  (!) 
pairs.     This  difficulty  would  require  a  few  words  of  explanation. 

AN  is  the  first  name,  but  also  the  first  pair,  for  AN  is  not  only 
explained  by  Anum  and  Antum, ^  but  also  by  an  =  Anum  and  an  = 
Antum ^=KI,  i.  e.,  =  irtsitim  or  earth. ^  If  Antum,  the  wife,  be  the 
*^ earth,"  then  Anum,  the  husband^  must  be  the  heaven.     Hence  the 


*C.  S.  p.  19,  4;  Monist,  XIII.  p.  586. 

2  See  below  ! 

^  From  this  it  follows  that  /z7=  5/zar  =  5^ar-^a/=wrw-?^/-/(a  =  (Anum -j- Antum 
sha  kish-shat)  AN-KI,  i.  e.,  "the  totality  0/ heaven  a7id  earth."  Hence  the  sJiar 
=kishshatu  =  totality  in  Enlil's  and  Anshar's  temple  6-shar  is  =  the  totality  of 
heaven  and  earth — and  the  cosmic  E-shar  must  he  =  heave?i  and  earth  ! 

*Does  our  modern  custom  of  the  wife's  taking  the  "name"  of  her  husband  go 
back  to  this  oldest  of  historic  times,  when  the  wife  was  the  sister — thus  also  of  one 
fiesh — of  her  husband  ?  Has  anyone  made  this  point  the  subject  of  a  special  in- 
vestigation ? 

«*C.  S.  p.  2>A  =  Monist,  XII.  p,  601. 

*  See  second  list ! 

'  See  first  list. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  21 

name  AN  reveals  to  us  the  remarkable  fact  that  it  is  2,  pair,  con- 
sisting out  of  husband  and  wife : 

Anum  -f  Antum,   that  the  husband  and  wife  are  also  brother  and 

sister : 
an  -\-  an,  and  that  the  husband  is  opposed  to  the  wife  : 

an  +  ki  =  heaven -f- earth — the  husband  being  ''above" 

and  the  wife  being  ''below." 

Thus  we  find  here  a  welcome  corroboration  of  our  statement  ^ 
that  ^^ heaven  and earth^*  were  considered  to  be  one.  This  one  cos- 
mic quantity  was  called  not  only  LIL,  but  also  AN.  AN  when 
translated  into  Semitic-Babylonian  becomes  =  shame.  Shame,  there- 
fore, must  stand  for  ^^  heaven  and  earth'''  too  !  "Heaven  and  earth" 
are  the  Sumerian  as  well  as  Semitic-Babylonian  and  Hebrew  ter- 
minus technicus  for  '^ cosmos^' — hence  shame  must  he  •=  cosmos /  Now 
we  understand  Hesychius's  remarkable  statement  quoted,  but  mis- 
understood, by  Jensen  in  his  Kosm.,  p.  3  :  ^avt]  (read  %avr})  6  Koa-fioi 
BaySvXwvtos,  i.  e.,  "shame  is  the  Babylonian  cosmos,"  and  Hesy- 
chius's  gloss  to  BrjXos  (=  Marduk):  ovpavo^  koI  Zevs  kol  Iloo-etSwvo?  vloq, 
i.  e.,  Bel  or  Marduk  (originally  =  Enlil !)  is  not  only  the  ovpav6<s 
(==  sham8  =  AN  =  an  -f-  ki  =  heaven  +  earth),  but  also  (our)  Zeus, 
and  a  son  of  (our)  Poseidon,  the  terrestrial  ocean  =:EN-KI  or  Ea 
(originally  AN,  the  heavenly  ocean  !).2  The  Sumerian  AN,  thus, 
is  indeed  a  word  for  cosmos  and  stands  as  such  for  the  first  "pair," 
i.  e.,  either  for  an  -|-  an,  or  for  an  -j-  ki  =  Anum  -|-  Antum,  the  per- 
sonifications of  "heaven  and  earth. "^ 

In  Craig,  Religious  Texts, ^  vfe  learn  of  "a  house  in  Nippur" 
called  Dur-an-ki^ — a  name  which  is  translated  by  "band  of  heaven 

*C.  S.  p.  52;  Monist,  XII.  p.  619. 

2  All  this  against  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  391. 

^Against  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  3. 

*  Vol.  I.  p.  19,  1.  9  :  esh  En-lil-ki  Dur-an-ki. 

^  This  Dur-an-ki  has  now  been  discovered  by  Hilprecht  as  one  of  the  names 
of  the  zigurrat  of  Nippur.  See  Hilprecht,  Excavations  in  Bible  Lands,  p.  462: 
"A  fourth  name  (viz.,  of  the  zigurrat  of  Nippur),  to  state  this  distinctly  here,  oc- 
curs in  another  unpublished  text belonging  to  the  results  of  our  latest  ex- 
cavations at  Nuffar." 


22  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

and  earth.  "^  According  to  Zeitschrift  fur  Assyriologie,  Vol.  X.,  p. 
294,  1.  I,  this  [Dur-an]-ki  is  called  *'the  band  of  heaven  and  earth, 
the  band  of  the  world"  {mar-kas  shame-e  u  irtsitim-tim  ri-kis  kib-ra- 
a-tt)^  which  was  situated  in  Nippur  (En-lil-ki,  1.  3)  and  which  En- 
lil  himself  has  made  (1.  4.).  Above  ^  we  have  seen  X.\\2X  ^-char- 
sag^^-gal^-kur-kur-ra  is  not  oxAy  ^=  ]k-shar-ra  but  also  =A-kur  *'the 
mountain  house,"  hence  also  this  latter  must  be  =  *'band  of  heaven 
and  earth."  But  the  god  oi  A-kur^  \}[iQdingir^.kur,  is  one  of  the 
"twenty-one  who  have  Anna  for  their  parent,"  hence  the  '*god  of 
6-kur"  must  also  be  the  '*god  of  the  band  of  heaven  and  earth." 
The  god  of  6kur  being  Enlil,  Enlil  becomes  thus  the  ''god  of  the 
band  of  heaven  and  earth,"  as  which  he  appears  in  K.  B.  VP.,  pp. 
46,  8;  48,  10. 

Furthermore,  just  as  the  ''band  of  the  sill"  is  =  sill,'  and  as 
the  ' ' firmament  of  heaven  "  is  =  heaven,*  so  is  the  ' '  band  of  heaven 
and  earth"  =  "heaven  and  earth  "^ — hence  D UR  = '$'^Tr\,  and  dur- 
^«-/&/  =  firmament  of  heaven  and  earth  =  heaven  and  earth.  The 
god  of  Dur-an-ki,  Enlil,  is  therefore  again  the  god  of  "heaven  and 
earth  "  or  of  the  "firmament  of  heaven  and  earth  "  ! 

Above  we  saw  that  AN  is  =  heaven  and  earth  =  cosmos,  hence 
the  dingir j)ur-an,^  who  is  said  to  be  =  ^'^«^^  (=  Bel  =  Enlil !),  is 
not  only  a  corroboration  that  our  conclusions  be  correct,  but  this 
name  also  shows,  that  <i^nstrDur-an  is  not  an  abbreviation  of  dtngir 
Dur-an-ki,"^  but  a  correct  and  justified  writing.  din^irDur-an  means 
the  "god  of  the  band  of  the  shame''  z=%av7j,  which  is  the  *^ Baby- 
lonian cosmos,''  i.  e.,  heaven  and  earth  =  an  -f-  l^i  • 

COROLLARIES  OF  THE  SOLUTION. 
These  considerations  put  us  into  a  position  to  explain  also  the 
following  peculiarities : 

^  Rikis  sha?ne  u  itsirtim,  from  rakcisu  to  bind.     Dur=ri-ki-is,  A.  S    K.  T., 
p.  71,  col.  I,  22. 
2  P.  8. 

'K.  8665,  Meissner,  SuppL,  p.  14,  hinten :  rikis  si;p;pi=si^i. 
*  D^?::^n  r^pi  =  C^?5rJ,  Cen.  i.  8.  «  Dur-an-M^an-ki. 

•II.  R.  54,  4a.  '  As  Hilprecht,  Excavations,  p.  463,  2,  thinks. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  2$ 

a.  The  god  IM,  whom  we  identified  with  Nin-Girsu  or  Im-gig- 
ghu-bar-bar  is  called  ^Uhe  son  ^/ ^ ;///«,  "^  instead  of — as  in 
case  of  Nin-Girsu — the  son  of  Enlil.  Anna  being  here  only 
another  name  for  Enlil,  the  ''king  of  heaven  and  earth," 
must  stand  here  likewise  for  '' cosmos.  "^ 

b.  Very  often  we  read  of  the  ''hosts  of  A-nim'"^  as  well  as  of  the 

^'warriors  of  A-num,  i.  e.,  {sic/)  Da-gan.''^^ 

That  Anum  be  here  =  Enlil  is  apparent  from  the  follow- 
ing reasons : 

tt.  The  tsa-ab  resp.  qi-its-ri  Aniin  was  rightly  recognised^  to 
correspond  to  the  Hebrew  niNDiJ  nrr — hence  Anim  =  Jah- 
veh  ! 

^.  According  to  Gen.  ii.  i,  the  ''hosts"  belong  to  "the 
heaven  and  the  earth "^ — hence  the  "hosts  of  Jahveh" 
are  those  of  "heaven  and  earth,"  i.  e.,  Jahveh  =  cosmos. 

y.  "Heaven  and  earth"  or  the  cosmos  are  in  Hebrew  as 
well  as  in  Babylonian  the  respective  domains  of  Enlil  or 
Jahveh.  The  former  has  therefore  the  title  "king  of 
heaven  and  earth, "^  and  the  latter  "god  of  heaven  and 
earth  "^ — hence  Jahveh  ==  cosmos  =  Enlil. 

S.  Anum  is  one  of  the  "twenty-one  who  have  Anna  for 
their  parent"  and  corresponds  not  only  to  the  Sumerian 
an  +  an  or  an  -\-  ki,  but  also  to  AN,  i.  e. ,  the  Saviy,  and 
to  the  AN  in  dingirDur-AN,  i.  e.,  he  is  the  personified 
cosmos,  as  such  also  called  dinsir^-kur  who  is  the  Enlil. 
Hence  Anim  =  Enlil.      But  if  Anim  be  here  =  Enlil,  then 

^  Reisner,  Hymnen,  p.  120,  10,  15. 

2  See  also  the  different  genealogies  of  Ninib  in  my  forthcoming  article  on 
Jahveh,  and  also  the  genealogies  of  Nusku,  the  son  of  Ann  =  Enlil  =  lord  of  heaven 
and  earth  =  6-kur  =  Dur-an-ki,  who  again  were  identified  with  Ea  =  ocean  and  with 
Sin. 

^  See  e.  g.  K.  B.  VI'.  pp.  122.  4;   134,  31  et  fassim:  qi-its-ri  sha  *i"A-nim. 

*Sargon,  Bronce-Inscrift.,  14  :  tsa-ab  ^^^ A-num  u  (Far.  ii)  *^^Da-gan. 

5  Jensen,  K.  B.  VP.  431. 

'lugal  an-ki. 

8  y-ixni  n^)::^n  ^ro^  m.T. 


24  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

the  hosts  can  be  only  the  children  resp.  grundchildren  of 
Enlil,  i.  e.,  ZU  ox  the  moon,  Nin-Girsu  or  the  thunder- 
ing dark  cloud,  UD  or  the  sun,  Innanna  or  the  morning- 
resp.  evening-star,  etc.  These  children  are  gods  and  stars 
— even  Nin-Girsu  =  Adad  was  considered  to  be  a  star  : 
VR.  46,  44^/^  =  mul  nu-mush-da  =  ^^^Sha-gi-mu  and  K.  263: 
[  ]  nu-mush-da  =  namashshu  =  ^^^Adad.  Shdgimu  is  a  name 
of  Adad  and  signifies :  ''the  one  that  roars  or  thunders." 
See  also  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  140.  Hence  the  qm^X  ''2D  men- 
tioned together  with  Jahveh  in  Psalm  xxix.  i  ff.,  can  be 
only  =  the  children  of  Enlil,  as  such  also  gods  and  stars 
and  the  powers  of  nature — for  even  according  to  Hebrew 
conception  the  stars  belong  to  the  r^pi  (Gen.  i.  14;  C. 
S.  p.  53),  which  i?^pi  again  is  =  Dur-an-ki,  the  habita- 
tion of  dingirDur-an  or  Enlil !  The  mXDU  T^T^  corresponds, 
therefore,  exactly  to  the  title  of  Enlil  ''king  of  the  gods" 
{lugal  dtngir-ri-ne')  or  to  the  tsa-ab  resp.  qi-its-ri  Anim. 

c.  Above,  p.  6,  we  heard  that  Anshar  =  Ashshur  is  said  to 
have  been  the  "creator  of  An-na"^ — an  expression  which 
signifies  the  same  as  that  on  p.  7,  above,  where  Anshar  = 
Ashshur  appears  as  the  "builder  of  the  heaven  of  Anim."^ 
Anu  is  in  our  three  lists  a  name  for  "the  god  of  6-kur," 
i.  e.,  for  Enlil.  AN  or  AN-NA,  we  saw,  means  =  iSav?;  = 
Assyr  shame — hence  "the  builder  of  AN-NA"  can  mean 
only  the  "builder  or  creator  of  the  cosmos ^'^  as  such  it  is 
parallel  to  the  "builder  of  the  sa-mi  {i.  e.,  Saviy  =  cosmos) 
of  i^^A-nim  =  Enlil.  The  "heaven(s)  of  Anu"  therefore  are 
not  the  abode  of  god  AN,  the  heavenly  ocean,  but  are  in 
each  and  every  case  the  cosmos,  "heaven  and  earth"  the 
abode  of  Enlil,  or  more  especially,  the  "firmament  of 
heaven"  or  "heaven"  as  opposed  to  the  "firmament  of  the 
earth"  or  "earth,"  the  specific  domain  of  Ninlil.  "The 
great  gods  that  inhabit  the  shame  of  Anim "  are  therefore 
the  moon,  sun,  the  stars,  and  the  powers  of  nature  (=:Adad), 

'  ba-mi-ti  shu-ut  AN-  \^N'\A.  ^  fa-ti-iq  sa-mi  *^'*A-mm. 


BEL,    THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  25 

etc.  Hence  we  cannot  find  in  this  phrase  the  idea — as  Jere- 
mias,  Vorstellungen  vom  Leben  nach  dem  Tode,  p.  60,  wants  it 
-^that  the  *'Wohnsitz  der  Gotter  in  verschiedene  abge- 
grenzte  Himmel  geteilt  ist."     See  also  Jensen,  Kosm.j  p.  11. 

d.  In  the  sentence  **the  daughter  of  Anu  (=  Ishtar)  went  to 
Bel  her  father,"  above  p.  i,  note  2,  Anu  and  Bel  signify  the 
same  god.  Ishtar  is  the  daughter  of  Bel  because  she  is  the 
wife  (as  such  called  Bau)  of  Nin-  Girsu.  But  Nin-Girsu 
being  the  son  of  Enlil  or  Bel,  his  wife  had  to  become  also  a 
daughter  of  Bel — because  a  wife  is  always  the  sister  of  her 
husband. 

e.  As  already  said,  the  ** heaven  and  earth,"  originally  one,  were 

later  on  differentiated  and  considered  as  husband  and  wife : 
Enlil  -|-  Ninlil  =  Enshar  -j-  Ninshar,  etc., — the  wife  being  not 
only  the  sister  but  also  ''opposed"  to  her  brother  or  hus- 
band. Thus  it  happed  that  there  corresponds  to  the  En- 
shar, the  husband,  an  An-shar,  and  to  the  Ninshar,  the  wife, 
a  Ki-shar,  in  other  words :  the  husband  was  considered  to 
be  *' above '*  =  an,  and  the  wife  to  be  ''below"  =ki.  The 
"heaven"  becomes  thus  the  husband  of  the  "earth."  This 
"heaven  and  earth '*  had  two  sons:  the  "moon  (ZU)  and 
the  "thundering,  lightning,  dark  cloud"  (Nin-Girsu  or  Im- 
gig-ghu-bar-bar),  who  by  means  of  his  nature  was  the 
"mighty  hero  or  prime  minister  "  of  his  father.  The  "moon'' 
had  for  his  son  the  sun  (UD).  Exactly  the  same  genealogy 
we  find  again  in  Orac.  Sib.,  III.  no  ff.,  where  Kronos,  Ti- 
tan, and  Japetos  are  called  the  sons  of  Ouranos  (=  heaven) 
and  Gaia  (the  earth).  Now,  there  cannot  be  any  doubt  that 
Kronos  was  originally  the  moon,  who  had  become  at  the  time 
when  this  genealogy  was  imported  from  the  Babylonians, 
the  "sun."i  This  change  took  place  at  a  time  when  the 
people  began  to  reckon  according  to  "sun-years."  We 
would  like,  therefore,  to  identify  Kronos  with  UD  the  sun 

'An  analogy  of  this  we  find  also  in  the  Old  Testament,  Gen.  i.  16,  where  the 
sun  is  likewise  put  before  the  moon  and  called  "  the  greater  light."  See  C.  S., 
p.  65. 


26  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

(originally  the  moon),  Titan  with  Nin-Girsu,  ^^the  mighty 
hero,''  diXid.  Japetos  with  the  moon  (originally  the  sun).^ 

These  identifications  explain  also  correctly  the  hitherto  mis- 
understood statement  of  Berosus,^  according  to  which  Kronos  ^Q.xns 
Chisouthros  (=  Ut-napishtim'),  while  according  to  the  Babylonian 
flood-story  it  is  Ea.  On  account  of  this  peculiarity  Jensen  ^  identi- 
fied Kronos  with  Ea  ;  but  wrongly  !  Ea  is  =  Poseidon.  Marduk  is 
in  the  theological  system  the  son  of  Ea  or  Poseidon.  But  Marduk 
is  the  AMAR-UD,  i.  e.,  the  son  of  UD — according  to  his  name — 
and  UD  is  =  Kronos,  hence  Markuk,  the  AMAR-UD,  may  quite 
correctly  be  called  the  *'son  of  Kronos."  If  Kronos  was  the  father 
of  Marduk,  the  chief-god  of  the  Babylonians,  then  Ahuramazda 
had  to  have  likewise  Kronos  for  his  father !  Hence  the  gloss  to 
Belos  in  the  Arm.  Vers,  of  Euseb.  Chron.,  loc.  cit.,  p.  19:  Kpovov, 
quem patrem  nuncupant  Aramazdi.^ 

Returning  once  more  to  our  three  lists  we  will  have  to  distin- 
guish between 

a.  AN  ^"heavenly  ocean,"  who  is  called  in  two  of  our  lists 

*'the  lord,  the  parent  AN-NA,"  and  is  as  such  the  father  of 
those  twenty-one  gods — or  better  of  one  god  under  twenty- 
one  different  names.  In  Assyrian  this  god  is  called  Anum, 
and  is  a  brother  of  Ea.  Anu  and  Ea  again  are  sons  of  the 
** mother  that  brought  forth  AN  and  KI  =  "heavenly  and 
terrestrial  ocean,"  i.  e.,  of  dinsirGUR. 

b.  AN  =  cosmos.     As  such  it  stands  either  for  an  =  Anum -}- 
an  =  Antum  or   for  an  =  Anum-)-ki  (i.  e.,  earth)=  Antum. 

^This  against  Zimmern,  K  A.  T^.  p.  351,  who  thinks  that  they  are  "  genau 
entsprechend  der  babylonischen  Trias  Anu-Bel-Ea  als  Sohnen  des  Paares  Anshar- 
Kishar. 

"^  Liber  chron.,  edit.  Schoene,  p.  19-20.  ^  Kosm  ,  p.  391. 

*  This  statement  is  very  important.  It  shows  that  Ahuramazda  was  considered 
to  be  the  same  as  Marduk — had  therefore  t6  have  the  same  father.  Ahriman  and 
Ahuramazda  is  Marduk  differentiated  into  the  Marduk  of  the  winter  =  darkness, 
and  the  Marduk  of  the  summer  =  light.  The  Marduk  of  the  winter  is  =  Nebo,  and 
the  Marduk  of  the  summer  =  AMAR-UD.  Cf.  the  important  passage  Isaiah  xlv.  7: 
"  I  am  the  lord I  form  the  light,  and  create  darkness."  Here  the  prophet  ex- 
pressly denies  that  light  and  darkness  have  two  different  sources.  Both  have  one 
god  for  their  author, — a  very  correct  Babylonian  idea. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  27 

Anum^  resp.  Antum  is  here  only  another  name  for  Enlil  resp. 
Ninlil,  the  king  resp.  queen  of  ''heaven  and  earth"  !  This 
AN  is  the  %avr}  or  Kocrfios  Ba(3vXiovLo^  of  Hesychius.^ 

^  This  name  Anum  was  even  applied  to  the  moon-god,  Sin  !  See  IV.  R.  9,  6a, 
and  K.  155,  quoted  by  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  191,  note  i.  This  is  not  strange.  We 
know  that  in  Ur  as  well  as  in  Harran  the  god  Sin  was  considered  to  be  the  highest 
god,  hence — if  he  were — he  had  to  receive  all  the  attributes  names,  etc.,  of  Enlil. 
Yes.  even  Nin-Girsu  the  "  mighty  hero"  of  Enlil  became  Sin's  messenger  and  this 
under  the  name  of  Nusku  resp.  Nergal,  see  above,  page  3,  note  5. 

2  Here  belongs  beside  the  <^*^sirDur-an,  and  the  expressions  :  ' '  the  creator  of 
AN-NA,"  "the  shamS  of  Anim,"  mentioned  above,  also 

a,  dingir Si  =dingir En-lil :  V.  R.  44,  35,  because  Si  is  =  s/iamil  =  'Eavij\     See  II. 

R.  50,  25c,  cf.  II.  R.  39,  47  f.     (Against  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  24.) 
ly    dingir BE=idingirE7i-lil:  I.  R.  15,  51  ;  V.  R.   4,  III   etc.,   for  BE  is  again  = 
shamU  :  II.  R.  7,  26a  ;  V.  R.  39,  45^, 

c.  dingir j\ijiB.     The  sigu  NAB  is  expressed  by  two  aw's,  one  put  above  the 

other,  NAB  has  according  to  Delitzsch,  Assyrische  Lesestucke,  No.  90,  the 
meaning  shamii.  This  NAB  is  again  (because  =  an -fan  =  heaven -j- earth) 
=  Cosmos.  The ''»«^*>A^^^  is  not  only  identified  with  dingir  En-lil  \n  V.  R. 
44,  46c.,  but  he  is  called — like  the  "  twenty-one  who  have  AN-NA  for  their 
parent" — the  dumu  sag  AN-NA,  i.  e.,  the  first-born  or  principal  son  of 
AN-NA  (  =  heavenly  ocean)  :  Reisner,  Hymnen,  pp.  140,  194;  135,  col.  IV. 
I  ;  88.  7.  And  when  this  dingir mAB  is  called  in  11.  R.  54,  loa,  ^>,  the  "Bel 
of  the  shamii,''  he  does  not,  as  Jensen,  Kosmologie,  p.  25,  cf.  K.  B.  VI^  p. 
347  wants,  stand  for  "den  Punkt  am  Himmel,  wo  die  verschiedenen  Tei- 
lungslinien  zusammenlaufen,"  but  for  the  Bel  of  the  ^avri\  [NAB  is  also  == 
Tiamat :  83-1-18,  1332  obv.  II.  22,  published  in  Proceedings  of  the  Society 
of  Biblical  Arch.,  Dec,  1888,  plate  V.  But  Tidmat  is  =  '^'>'-r»>-6^t/"i?,  "  the 
mother  of  AN  and  KI."  GUR  again  is  not  only  =  a^5/?,  "ocean,"  but  also, 
if  pronounced  zikum,  —shamii.  Hence  NAB  signifies  Tidmat  as  the  mother 
of  the  afsU  or  ocean  considered  as  a  cosmos  or  shamii  or  AN  -\-  KI,  i,  e.,  of 
the  ocean  as  consisting  of  an  upper  and  of  a  lower  one  !] 

d.  Possibly  even  AN-SHAR,  who  might  be  read  also  '^i^srirSHAR.  SHAR, 
when  pronounced  "du,"  is 3.\so  =  shamii;  hence  dingir SHAR  {  =  du)  might  be 
translated  "  the  god  of  the  'Eavj],  i.  e  ,  cosmos  !  E-shar  would  accordingly  be- 
come not  so  much  "  the  house  of  the  totality  {  —  kishshatu) "  as  "the  zuorld- 
house.  See  also  above,  p.  14,  where  it  is  said  of  Marduk  that  he  had  build 
K-shar-ra  as  (or  :  to  be)  a  sha-ma-m,u,  i.  e.,  a  ^avrj  or  cosmos  !  This  sha- 
ma-mu  here,  because  it  is  the  habitation  of  Anu,  Bel  (  =  Enlil),  and  Ea, 
m-ust  include  the  tzuo  oceans — the  heavenly  and  the  terrestrial — also.  This 
peculiarity  is  even  adopted  by  the  Priestcode.  P.'s  expression  for  "cosm,os" 
is  generally  ="  heaven  and  earth":  Gen.  i.  i,  ii.  i,  Ex.  xxxi.  17;  but  also 
"heaven  and  earth  and  the  D*^,"  i.  e.,  ocean  :  Ex.  xx.  11  !  The  fi-shar-ra, 
the  world-house,  is  thus  made  =  heaven  and  earth  and  ocean — a,  no  doubt, 
late  conception,  thus  showing  a  tendency  towards  henotheism,  resp.  mono- 
theism. 


28  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

c.  AN  ^\\\i^x z=  shamil,  i.  e.,  "heaven"  or  =  KI.,  i.  e.,  ''earth.'* 
The  former,  when  personified  may  also  be  called  Anum  or 
Enlil,  and  the  latter  Antum  or  Ninlil.  That  KI=  earth  was 
called  Antum  follows  also  from  different  other  passages  in 
the  cuneiform  literature,  as,  e.  g.,  Reisner,  ffymnen,  p.  133, 
No.  III.  (sic!),  11.  10-13,1  where  Antum  is  expressed  in  the 
Sumerian  line  by  KI,  the  ideograph  for  irtsitu  =  ediYth.. 
Again  on  another  place  ^  this  AN-NA  is  directly  translated 
by  shame  or  "heaven,'*  and  the  KI  (or  Kl-a)  directly  by 
irtsitim  or  ''earth'* — thus  proving  beyond  a  shadow  of  doubt 


1  dingirA-nun-na  AN-NA  a-ri-a-ne 

»'"ditto  sha  ri-chu-ut  ^^^A-nim  ri-cliu-u 
dingir A-nun-na  AY  (sic  !)  a-ri-a-ne 

»^«ditto  sha  ri-chu-ut  Antum  ri-chu-u. 

Instead  of  KI  we  have  the  correcter  writing  Kl-a  in  Reisner,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  132, 
19,  20;  78,  12,  13,  Cf.  also  IV.  R.  21,  No.  2,  rev.  i.  For  richMi  see  Jensen, 
K.  B.  VP.  p.  365,  6. 

2  dingivA-nun-na  AN-NA  mu-ush  V-bi 

<^^  A-nun-na-ki  sha  shamed  V shu-shi 
dingir/[-7iun-na  Kl-a  mu-ush  X-bi 

tit*  A-nun-na-ki  sha  irtsitim'^^  ni-e-ir-shu. 

Reisner,  Hymnen,  p,  139,  155-158. 

See  also  Reisner,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  92,  24,  25;  135,  col.  III.  30.  With  regard  to 
the  300  (  =  5  soss!)  "Anunna  of  heaven,"  and  with  regard  to  the  600  (i  ner)  "A- 
nunna  of  the  earth,"  see  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T^.  p.  453  ;  Jensen,  K.  B.  VP.  p.  587. 
The  passages  cited  in  this  and  the  preceding  note  are  important,  (i)  We  have  here 
the  Anunna  of  heaven,  i.  e.,  the  Igigi  and  the  Anunna  of  the  earth,  i.  e.,  the 
Anunnaki,  as  they  are  generally  called  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions.  Both  classes 
are  said  to  be  the  richut,  i.  e.,  lit.  "the  pouring  out"  =  s^^<^  or  50W5  of  Anu  and 
Antum.  (2)  We  have  seen  (C.  S.  p.  49)  that  the  king  of  the  storm-flood  is  Enlil, 
while  the  storm-flood  itself  is  Nin-Girsu  or  Imgigghubarbar,  the  son  of  Enlil. 
Hence,  when  we  read,  that  either  Bel,  i.  e.,  the  old  Enlil,  be  the  "lord,  the  king 
of  all  Anunnaki "  (Tiglat-Pileser  I.  =K.  B.  I.  p.  14,  col.  I.  3),  or  that  Anu  be  "the 
king  of  the  Igigi  and  the  Anunnaki "  (Shalmanassar  II.,  Obelisk  =  K.  B^.  p.  128, 
1.  2),  or  that  Ashshur  (  =  Anshar)  be  termed  "the  king  of  the  Igigi"  (Adad-nirari 
III  =K.  B^  p.  188,  No.  2,  11,  2,  3),  we  must  understand  these  statements  as  above, 
i.  e.,  that  these  kings  of  the  Igigi  and  the  Anunnaki  are  at  the  same  time  their 
fathers,  and  if  so,  then  Enlil  is  =  Anu  =  Anshar.  See  here  also  above,  p.  7,  where 
it  is  expressly  said  that  Anshar  is  he  "who  begot  {shd;pik  =  rdchil !)  the  Igigi  and 
the  Anunnaki  "  !  Where  the  moon-god  Sin  was  considered  to  be  the  highest  god, 
it  is,  of  course,  natural  to  find  that  these  very  same  Igigi  and  Anunnaki  should  be 
assigned  to  his  court,  as  is  done  in  the  celebrated  hymn  to  Sin  :  IV.  R.  9. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  29 

that  Anum^=AN  is  =  heaven  and  Antum  =  KI  is  :=  earth. 
AN  thus  means  indeed  either  heaven  or  (!)  earths 

SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS. 

If  we  would  sum  up  our  results  so  far  obtained  they  would  be 
the  following  : 

Out  of  the  primeval  ocean,  Apsu  and  Tiamat,  the  Sumerian 
GUR,  is  born  mummu  or  Moumis,  voyjto^  Koa-fio^ — which  was  only  a 
** world,"  i.  e.,  an  AN  and  a  KI  in  mind,  but  not  in  fact.  It  be- 
came a  world  in  fact,  when  AN  begot  LIL,  who  took  his  place  be- 
tween AN  and  KI,  thus  not  only  separating  the  AN  from  the  KI, 
but  forming  with  them  the  first  /riad.  This  LIL,  the  son  of  AN, 
appears  in  the  lists  above  mentioned  under  twenty-one  different 
names  among  which  are  also  to  be  found  Anshar  and  Lachmu. 
These  names  are  arranged  in  pairs  of  husband  and  wife — the  hus- 


^  That  one  and  the  same  ideograph  should  have  two  diametrically  opposed  sig- 
nifications is  not  by  any  means  uncommon — it  is  simply  a  corroboration  of  Winck- 
ler's  maxim  :  ' '  Jedes  Ding  schlagt  schliesslich  in  sein  Gegentheil  um,  wie  es  der 
Kreislauf  der  Natur  vorschreibt  und  bedingt :  Wir  haben  die  unzertrennlichen  und 
doch  getrennten  Dioskuren,  Mond  und  Sonne  =  Tag  und  Nacht  =  Licht  und  Finster- 
niss= Winter  und  Sommer,  die  beiden  Sonnen-  und  Naturhalften  "  (M.  V.  A.  G., 
1901,  IV.,  Part  I.,  p.  15,  note  i),  and  I  may  add  the  "two  halves  of  the  world"  : 
heaven  and  earth.  Among  the  different  ideographs  that  may  stand  either  for 
'  heaven  "  or  for  "earth,"  I  mention  besides  AN  only  the  two  following  : 

a.  IM=heaven,  Sc.  i^Z;— earth,  ibidem.  A  double  IM,  Briinnow,  List,  No. 
12241,  cf.  No.  8502,  is  translated  in  II.  R.  50,  28^ ;  II.  R.  48,  26a-b,  by 
shamfl,  which  latter  can  mean  here  only  =  cosmos  =  heaven  -|- earth.  Hence 
the  di»s^^^IM -\-  IM  in  III.  R.  67,  45^;  III.  R.  67,  42^,  cannot  signify  orig- 
inally the  god  Adad  (or  Ramman)  but  Enlil  or  Bel,  the  god  of  "  heaven  and 
earth."  Cf.  here  also  "the  gods  who  are  above  {eli)  the  IM  and  below 
(shapal)  the  IM  "  (Pinches,  P.  S.  B.  A.,  1882,  p.  164,  lo-ii),  i.  e.,  beyond 
the  firmament  or  "heaven  and  earth,"  which  in  the  passage  cited,  p.  163, 
1.  10,  is  called  the  Char-sag--kalam-ma  =  monni3L\n  of  the  world  ! 

b.  U=shamit  "heaven"  :  V.  R.  36,  456  ;  U,  also  read  buru,=irtsitu  :  V.  R. 
36,  /if6b  and  U  is  the  ideograph  for  dingirEn-lil:  V.  R.  36,  5a.  This  ideo- 
graph therefore  signifies  Enlil  as  the  god  of  ' '  heaven  and  earth  " — and  just 
as  in  later  times  Enlil  became  an  ideographic  writing  for  bel  or  lord,  so  U 
was  used  as  an  ideograph  for  bel.  Conf,  here  also  V.  R.  37,  4c?.  e,f\  burn 
or  A-buru  =  5/iam^  ruqUtum  "  the /"ar  away  heaven,"  and  1.  5:  bum  — 
shamtl  sha^lMum  "the  low(er)  heaven,"  which  latter  does  not  speak  so 
much  in  favor  of  the  ' '  different "  heavens,  as  it  proves  that  the  ' '  lower 
heaven  "  be  the  earth  ! 


30  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

band  being  considered  the  upper  and  the  wife  the  lower  part.  The 
upper  part  is  the  heaven  and  the  lower  part  the  earth.  This  gives 
us  the  most  important  fact  of  our  whole  investigation,  which  is : 
heaven  and  earth  are  husband  and  wife,  as  such  called  Anum  and 
Antum  who  again  are  only  two  other  names  for  Enlil  and  Ninlil — 
Enlil  is  the  heaven  and  Ninlil  is  the  earth  when  considered  as  hus- 
band and  wife,  but  when  considered  as  *'one  flesh"  Enlil  resp. 
Ninlil  is  the  *' heaven  and  earth"  or  "cosmos,"  hence  may  be  called 
**king  resp.  queen  of  heaven  and  earth.  "^ 

^  Therefore  Anu  is  called  also  "  (the  one)  of  the  totality  of  heaven  and  earth." 
See  p.  i8,  note  2. 


II.  THE  ESSENTIAL  DOCTRINE  OF  BABY- 
LONIAN RELIGION. 

THE  BELIEF  IN  RESURRECTION. 

IT  was  not  without  some  very  definite  reason  that  we  had  to  linger 
so  very  long  over  this  preliminary  investigation,  for  here  we 
are  in  direct  opposition  to  all  other  Assyriologists,  who  either  take 
Enlil  to  be  the  ''god  of  the  earth"  or  the  ''god  of  the  air." 

Our  result  is  of  the  highest  importance,  not  only  for  a  right 
understanding  of  the  Babylonian  religion  as  such,  but  also  for  the 
religion  both  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament.  In  the  latter  it 
is  especially  the  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  which  from  our  investi- 
gation receives  a  new  and  welcome  light. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection,  because  so  closely  connected 
with  the  personality  of  Christ,  is  the  central  doctrine  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion.  It  is  the  pillar  upon  which  the  Christian  Church  is 
built.     With  it  Christianity  stands  and  falls.     Says  St.  Paul : 

"If  Christ  be  not  raised,  then  is  our  preaching  vain,  our 
faith  also  is  vain"  (i  Cor.  xv.  14.) 
And  again,  v.  17  : 

"If  Christ  hath  not  been  raised,  your  faith  is  vain." 
It  is,  however,  here  of  special  interest  to  notice  what  philo- 
sophic proofs  St.  Paul  is  able  to  adduce  for  the  resurrection  of  Christ. 
His  proofs  are : 

"Now  if  Christ  is  preached  that  he  hath  been  raised  from 
the  dead,  how  say  some  among  you  that  there  is  no  resur- 
rection of  the  dead?  But  if  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  neither  hath  Christ  been  raised.  "^ 

*  I  Cor.  XV.  12,  13. 


32  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

The  same  argument  is  to  be  found  also  in  verses  15,  16 : 

*'We  witnessed  of  God  that  he  raised  up  Christ:  whom 
he  raised  not  up,  if  so  be  that  the  dead  are  not  raised.  For 
if  the  dead  are  not  raised,  neither  hath  Christ  been  raised.'* 
Notice,  St.  Paul  does  not  say:  *' because  Christ  rose,  there- 
fore the  dead  rise,"  but  vice  versa-.  ''If  there  be  no  resurrection  of 
the  dead,  then  Christ  did  not  rise;"  he  wants  us,  however,  to  draw 
the  last  conclusion:  ''there  is  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  if 
there  be,  then  did  Christ  rise  ! "  Paul,  then,  takes  it  for  an  in- 
disputable fact  that  the  dead  can  and  do  rise,  and  because  they  can 
and  do  rise  therefore  Christ  also  could  and  did  rise.  Hence  with 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  resurrection  of  Christ  is  given. 
The  fact  of  Christ's  resurrection  is  thus  based,  according  to  St. 
Paul's  argumentation,  upon  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
as  such.  If  you  deny  the  latter,  you  ipso  facto  deny  the  former. 
Everything  depends  upon  our  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead.  If  we  do  not  believe  in  this,  we  do  not  and  cannot  believe 
in  Christ's  resurrection  !  Hence,  it  is  quite  natural,  that  St.  Paul, 
when  adducing  the  arguments  in  favor  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ, 
should  bring  in  also  those  proofs  which  establish  the  truth  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  !     And  what  are  these? 

"But  some  one  will  say,  how  are  the  dead  raised?  and 
with  what  manner  of  body  do  they  come?  Thou  foolish  one, 
that  which  thou  thyself  sowest  is  not  quickened,  except  it 
die :  and  that  which  thou  sowest,  thou  sowest  not  the  body 
that  shall  be,  but  a  bare  grain,  it  may  chance  of  wheat,  or 
of  some  other  kind.  "^ 

The  proof  in  favor  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  taken  from 
natureX  He  compares  the  human  bodies  to  ^^ grain,  it  may  chance 
of  wheat,  or  of  some  other  kind."  The  grain  is  put  into  the  earth 
not  to  die  and  remain  there,  but  to  die  and  be  quickened  again, 
and  thus  sprout  anew,  rise  to  new  life,  and  bear  fruit.  But  this 
the  grain  does  only  in  the  spring !  St.  Paul's  argument  then  is  this : 
As  in  the  spring  nature  or  mother  earth  brings  forth  new  life, 

*  I  Cor.  XV.  25. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  33 

quickens  the  ** grain,"  makes  it  sprout  again,  so  also  the  '*dead" 
will  be  quickened,  be  raised  to  new  life  on  that  great  morning  when 
the  eternal  spring  begins  !  Nature  demonstrates  the  fact  of  the 
resurrection.  This  "resurrection,"  because  a  fact  in  nature,  was 
transferred \.o  **men"  also — because  they  too  are  a  part  of  nature! 
Men,  as  a  part  of  nature,  could  not  make  an  exception,  could  not 
upset  the  laws  of  nature,  hence  had  to  rise.  But  if  men,  as  a 
part  of  nature,  do  rise,  then  Christ  also  had  to  rise, — for  he  be- 
longs to  '*man."     That  is  the  argument  of  St.  Paul. 

DETAILS. 

Having  made  this  clear,  we  may  now  pass  to  the  details  in 
connection  with  Christ's  resurrection.  These  are  probably  enum- 
erated best  in  the  well-known,  but  most  difficult,  passage  of  i  St. 
Peter  iii.  i8  ff.,  where  we  read  : 

''Christ  also  suffered  for  sins  once. .  .  .being  put  to  death 
in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  in  the  spirit,  in  which  also  he 
went  and  preached  unto  the  spirits  in  prison,  which  afore- 
time were  disobedient ....  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ, 
who  is  on  the  right  hand  of  God,  having  gone  into  heaven; 
angels  and  authorities  and  powers  being  made  subject  unto 
him."i 

According  to  this  passage  the  specific  historic  facts  connected 
with  the  resurrection  of  Christ  occurred  in  the  following  sequence : 

I.  suffering,  2.  death,  3.  quickening,  4.  {a)  going  and  (/^) 
preaching  unto  the  spirits  in  prison,  5.  resurrection. 

As  Christ's  suffering  has  nothing  to  do  with  our  investigation 
here,  we  confine  ourselves  to  facts  Nos.  2-5. 

** Death"  according  to  N.  T.  usus  loquendi  is  the  separation  of 
the  ** life-principle"  or  ''soul"  from  the  "body."  The  body  is  put 
into  the  grave  while  the  soul  continues  to  live  as  a  "spirit."     To 


*  on  Kal  Xpiarbg  arraf  Trepl  d/napriuv  Ina'de. . .  .d^avarud^elg  jiev  aapKi,  ^uoTrocT/d^elc  (It' 
Tip  irvEVfiari  ev  ^  Kal  rolg  kv  ^w/la/c^  nvevfiaai  'Kopev&elq  eic^pv^ev  cnrei'&TjcaGi  ttote . . .  .Si 
avaoTaaeuc  'Irjaov  Xpiarov  bg  eariv  ev  Se^ig  r&v  ^eov,  iropev&elg  elg  ovpavdv,  imorayevTuv 
avT<f)  ayyi^iov  Kal  h^ovatuv  kol  dwd/neuv. 


34  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

such  spirits,  i.  e.,  souls  separated   from  the  body^  Christ  went  and 
preached. 

If  ^^ death''  be  a  separation  of  the  soul  from  the  body,  then  the 
^^ quickening''  must  be  2.  joining  together,  a  reuniting  of  the  soul 
and  body.  Christ  had  to  be  dead,  according  to  Scripture,  for  three 
days.  During  these  three  days,  then,  body  and  soul  were  sep- 
arated. After  these  three  days — or  as  the  varient  gives  it :  on  the 
third  day — he  had  to  rise,  hence  his  ** being  quickened"  and  his 
resurrection  had  to  fall  on  the  same  day  !  Christ  is  said  to  have 
risen  on  early  Easter-morning,  hence  his  quickening  or  the  re- 
uniting of  soul  and  body  must  have  taken  place  on  early  Easter- 
morning  too!  As  soon  as  this  *' quickening"  had  become  a  fact 
''he  went  and  preached."  If,  therefore,  the  question  be  asked: 
*' When  did  Christ  go  and  preach?  "  the  correct  answer  can  be  only 
this:  *'On  early  Easter-morning,  immediately  after  his  being 
'quickened  in  spirit'  !  "  In  this  (cv  <S)  ''being  quickened  in  spirit" 
he  went.  Hence  Christ's  going  and  preaching  did  not  take  place 
during  those  three  days,  while  his  body  was  lying  in  the  grave,  nor 
did  his  soul ovXy  go  down  to  the  prison,  but  "his  soul  reunited  to 
the  body" — for  he  was  quickened \  Christ's  journey  to  prison,  then, 
falls  between  his  being  quickened  and  his  resurrection,  i.  e.,  like- 
wise on  early  Easter-morning.  As  such  a  "  quickened  one  in  spirit," 
i.  e.,  as  one  having  acquired  new  life — a  spiritual  life^ — he  went 
and  preached,  or  better:  "he  going  preached"  {iropevOcU  iK-^pv^ev). 
And  what  did  he  preach?  The  "contents"  of  Christ's  preaching  is 
not  given  here.  We  are  therefore  obliged  to  determine  the  exact 
nature  of  this  iKrjpv^tv  from  the  context.  The  word  Krjpvaa-eLv  ex- 
presses simply  the  idea  that  Christ  "was  a  herald,"  or  "officiated 
as  a  herald,"  or  "proclaimed  something  after  the  manner  of  a 
herald."  A  herald  always  acts  in  the  name  and  upon  the  command 
oi  2.  higher  person — hence  whatever  Christ  proclaimed  or  heralded 

^  Also  according  to  Babylonian  conception  the  death  consists  in  a  separation 
of  the  napishtu  or  life-principle  from  the  body.  This  nafishtu  continues  to  live 
after  death  as  a  so-called  ekimmu  or  utukku,  see  also  Jensen,  K.  B.  VP.  pp.  406, 
453- 

2  This  is  the  common  explanation  of  the  phrase,  which,  however,  does  not 
explain  the  diflBculties  involved,  see  my  article  on  Jahveh  ! 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  35 

must  have  been  something  which  he  had  received  from  someone 
else,  something  to  which  he  was  authorised.  That  this  *' some- 
thing" cannot  have  been  the  ''gospel"  follows  from  the  following 
consideration. 

1.  '*To  preach  the  gospel"  is  expressed  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment always  by  cvayyeAt^eiv. 

2.  The  verse  in  i  Peter  iv.  6  :  ^^For  unto  this  end  was  the  gospel 
breached  even  unto  the  dead''  does  not  help  us  very  much  either,  for 
''the  dead"  are  those  who  were  alive  when  the  preaching  took 
place,  but  who  died  in  the  meantime.  Besides  that,  we  have  for 
the  "dead"  the  word   ve/cpots,^  and  for  to  preach   not /crypvo-crctv  but 

3.  Whenever  the  contents  of  the  proclaiming  or  heralding  are 
given,  this  is  expressed  by  an  object  which  follows  the  verb  Krjpvacreiv- 
Thus  we  have  to  preach  :  "Moses,"  Acts  xv.  21  ;  "circumcision," 
Gal.  V.  II ;  "the  word,"  Mark  i.  45;  "the  gospel  (of  the  king- 
dom)," Matth.  iv.  23;  Mark  xvi.  15;  "baptism,"  Mark  i.  4;  "re- 
pentance and  remission  of  sins,"  Luke  xxiv.  47;  "Christ,"  Acts 
viii.  5,  and  it  is  used  of  ''an  angel  as  God's  herald"  in  Rev.  v.  12. 

4.  Suppose,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  Christ  indeed 
preached  the  gospel  unto  the  spirits  in  prison  in  order  to  give  them  a 
last  chance  to  get  out  of  it — but  then  we  would  be  again  in  straight 
contradiction  to  the  parable  of  the  "rich  man  and  poor  Lazarus." 
What  this  parable  wants  to  teach  us  is  this  :  the  "  time  of  salvation'" 
is  here  upon  earth,  not  after  death  :  ' '  They  have  Moses  and  the  proph- 
ets, let  them  hear  them.'"     If  they  hear  them   and  do  accordingly, 

,they  will  be  saved,  if  they  do  not  listen  to  them  they  lose  all 
chances  of  their  salvation  !  Hence  there  was  not  and  could  not  be 
offered  to  the  "spirits  that  are  in  prison"  a  last  chance  \ 

This  last  consideration  leads  us  over  to  the  next  point  of  our 
inquiry,  viz.,  to  the  question  with  regard  to  the  meaning  of  the 
** prison,"  <l>v\aKy. 

This  prison  appears  here  as  a  kind  of  "keeping-place,"  a  place 
where  the  "spirits,"  the  "souls  separated  from   their  bodies,"  the 

*  And  not  irvevaaai  or  the  ' '  souls  separated  from  the  body  "  ! 


36  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

ekimmu  or  utukku  are  to  be  found.  The  ekimmu  and  utukku  have, 
according  to  Babylonian  ideas,  their  abode  in  the  '* nether  world" — 
a  place  which  was  considered  to  be  (within)  the  ^' earth.^'  It  would 
therefore  be  natural  to  suppose  that  this  place,  the  nether  world. 
Hades,  place  of  departed  spirits,  be  also  meant  here.  If  it  be,  then 
it  has  to  be  subdivided  again — according  to  the  parable  of  the 
''rich  man  and  poor  Lazarus" — into  two  subdivisions:  (i)  a  seem- 
ingly comfortable  place,  which  is  called  in  that  parable :  Abraham's 
bosom  (koXttos  A)8paa/i,) ;  (2)  an  uncomfortable  one  or  Hades  proper. 
In  the  former  we  find  Lazarus,  in  the  latter  the  rich  man.  Both  of 
these  men  arrive  in  their  respective  abodes  as  soon  as  they  die : 

*'And  the  beggar  died,  and....  was  carried  away  by  the 
angels  into  Abraham's  bosom,  and  the  rich  man  also  died, 
and  was  buried ....  and  in  Hades  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being 
in  torments,  and  seeth  Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his 
bosom  ! " 

If  the  "prison"  of  St.  Peter  be  the  same  as  the  Hades  with  its 
two  subdivisions,  the  question  may  be  asked  :  Did  Christ  go  to  the 
''uncomfortable"  or  the  "comfortable"  part  of  Hades  in  order  to 
preach?  According  to  St.  Peter  Christ  preached  "unto  the  spirits 
in  prison,  which  aforetime  were  disobedient ^  The  assumption, 
therefore,  might  seem  to  favor  the  view  that  he  went  to  Hades 
proper,  the  uncomfortable  place,  the  abode  of  the  rich  man. 
Granted  he  went  to  this  place,  and  granted  also  that  he  preached 
the  gospel  to  the  spirits  in  this  "place  of  torment"  in  order  to  give 
them  a  last  chance  to  secure  their  salvation,  then  again  we  would 
be  in  contradiction  to  Christ's  express  statements,  who  quotes 
Abraham  as  saying  : 

"And  beside  all  this,  between  us  and  you  there  is  a  great 
gulf  (x^arfM  fiiya)  fixed,  that  they  who  would  pass  from  hence 
to  you  may  not  be  able,  and  that  none  may  cross  over  from 
thence  to  us." 

In  other  words:  there  is  "no  getting  out"  any  more — those 
that  are  in  Abraham's  bosom  remain  there  for  ever,  and  those  that 
are  in  Hades  proper  cannot  be  transferred  any  more  to  Abraham's 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  37 

bosom  !  Hence  if  Christ  had  indeed  preached  the  '*  gospel  to  the 
spirits  in  Hades  proper"  he  would  have  done  something  which  was 
— to  say  the  least — useless,  for  he  knew  that  he  could  not  help 
them  !  From  this  it  follows  that  Christ  did  not  and  could  not  have 
preached  the  gospel,  nor  did  he  or  could  he  have  gone  to  Hades 
proper,  the  uncomfortable  place  ! 

Above  we  saw  that  the  verb  Krjpva-a-eLv  simply  expresses  the  idea 
that  Christ  as  the  messenger  of  a  higher  person,  heralded  or  pro- 
claimed something.  This  he  did  immediately  after  his  ''being 
quickened  in  the  spirit" — after  having  acquired  a  new  (spiritual) 
life.  With  his  being  quickened  Christ's  battle  against  the  powers 
of  darkness  :  death  and  grave  comes  to  an  end.  It  is  the  assurance 
that  he  has  become  the  victor,  the  king  not  only  over  death  but 
also  over  life.  As  such  a  king  over  life  and  death  it  behoves  him 
to  sit  in  judgment  over  the  life  and  death  of  the  spirits  in  prison — 
and  not  only  over  these,  but  also  over  that  of  all  mankind.  Christ's 
heralding — because  it  cannot  be  a  preaching  of  the  gospel — must 
therefore  express  the  idea  that  He  as  king  over  life  and  death  has 
now  also  the  fates  with  regard  to  the  life  and  death  of  the  whole  of 
mankind  and  in  particular  of  the  spirits  in  prison  in  his  hand.  He 
instantly  exercises  the  powers  that  belong  to  him  :  he  sits  in  judg- 
ment over  the  fates  of  the  spirits — he  becomes  what  the  Babylo- 
nians would  call  a  mushim  shimdit,  i.  e.,  *'one  that  determines  (and 
destines  and  seals)  the  fates."  As  such  a  mushim  shimdti  he  is  a 
herald — one  that  acts  for  another  person.  This  ''other  person" 
is,  as  we  shall  see  shortly,  "the  great  gods,"  or  in  New  Testament 
language  "God  the  Father." 

Judgment,  however,  is  not  passed  except  in  a  place  especially 
set  aside  for  this  purpose.  This  place  is  called  here  "prison"  ;  as 
such  it  is  a  house,  a  room  in  which  the  spirits  are  "kept"  to  await 
their  judgment,  and  has,  therefore,  nothing  to  do  with  Hades.  We 
shall  hear  more  about  this  room  when  we  come  to  speak  of  the 
Babylonian  Ubshugina. 

If  we  sum  up  our  results  they  would  be  the  following  :  Christ 
died  :  body  and  soul  were  separated,  this  separation  lasted  for  three 
days  !     On  the  third  day  his  body  and  soul  were  reunited  again : 


38  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

he  was  quickened  in  the  spirit — acquired  a  new  spiritual  (?)  life. 
This  took  place  on  early  Easter-morning.  But  not  only  the  quick- 
ening occured  at  this  time  but  also  his  "showing  or  his  proclaim- 
ing himself  as  the  victor,"  and  his  resurrection.  The  proclaiming 
himself  as  victor  took  place  in  a  room  called  "prison,"  where  the 
departed  spirits  were  kept,  held  for  judgment.  By  this  heralding 
\h^  fates  of  the  spirits  were  sealed  or  determined, — Christ  becomes 
thus  a  Babylonian  mushim  shimati,  i.  e.,  "one  who  determines  the 
fates,"  as  such  he  acts  again  as  "herald,"  i,  e.,  as  one  commis- 
sioned by  a  higher  authority,  which  latter  are  the  gods.  After 
Christ  had  "determined  the  fates"  of  the  spirits  in  prison,  he  rises. 
He  could  and  did  rise,  because  he  was  man.  Man  again  can  and 
does  rise  because  he  is  part  of  "nature,"  and  nature  demonstrates 
to  us  every  year  in  the  spring  that  "the  dead  do  rise  to  new  life" 
— hence  as  there  is  a  resurrection  of  nature,  so  there  is  and  was 
also  a  Resurrection  of  Christ ! 

ORIGIN  OF  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  RESURRECTION. 

That  this  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  cannot  have  its  source 
in  the  Old  Testament  is  now  admitted  by  all  who  made  this  the 
subject  of  a  special  investigation ;  see  here  especially  Professor 
Gunkel's  article  in  The  Monist  for  April,  1903,  pp.  417-419  and  439 
-440,  where  he  considers  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  his  descent 
into  Hades,  inclining  to  the  belief  that  these  doctrmes  were  brought 
to  Judaism  from  "a  stellar  religion  in  which  it  was  the  ideal  of  the 
faithful  to  be  snatched  away  from  the  transitoriness  of  the  earth 
and  to  become  like  unto  the  ever-beaming  divine  stars."  And  a 
little  further  below  he  says  (p.  419):  "It  is  well  known  that  the  be- 
lief in  life  af'.er  death  has  long  been  present  in  a  number  of  Oriental 
religions,  for  example,  the  Egyptian  and  the  Persian,  and  that  the 
whole  Orient  was  filled  with  it  at  the  time  of  which  we  are  speak- 
ing. It  is  not  remarkable  that  Judaism  also  finally  adopts  this  be- 
lief, but  rather  is  it  strange  that  it  resisted  the  belief  so  long."  In- 
deed, it  is  strange  that  Judaism  did  resist  this  belief  so  long,  seeing 
that  the  belief  in  the  resurrection  existed  among  the  Babylonians  as 
early  as  the  time  of  Gudea,  patesi  of  Shirpula,  at  about  3200  B.  C. 


V,EL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  39 

But  some  one  may  say  that  there  are  several  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament  which  do  show  that  the  Hebrews  did  believe  in  a 
resurrection,  quoting  especially  the  familiar  passage  in  Job  xix.  25: 
"I  know  that  my  redeemer  liveth,,  etc. "  Professor  Gunkel,  when 
speaking  of  this  passage,  remarks  quite  rightly,  all  we  can  gather 
from  this  passage  is  that  "Job  thinks  for  a  moment  of  the  possibil- 
ity that  God  may  justify  him  even  after  death "(/^^.  «/.,  p.  417). 
On  account  of  the  importance  of  this  doctrine  it  would  seem  ad- 
visable to  examine  the  several  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  more 
closely  and  see  whether  we  cannot  detect  in  them  at  least  sowe 
traces  of  a  belief  in  a  resurrection  and  a  life  after  death. 

The  several  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  with  regard  to  a 
life  after  death  and  a  possible  resurrection  may  be  divided  into 
three  classes  :^ 

I.  Those  according  to  which  the  "state"  after  death  is  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  life  upon  the  earth.  According  to  this  view  the 
dead  possess  a  certain  degree  of  self-consciousness,  retain  their 
power  of  speech  and  movement, ^  have  knowledge,  are  therefore 
called  c"*::?T  =  "  knowing  ones'*;^  they  not  only  know  what  hap- 
pens upon  the  earth,  but  they  also  take  an  interest  in  the  fortunes 
of  their  living  brethren:  "Rachel  weeps  for  her  children,"^ — as  if 
she  knew  what  had  happened  to  the  Jews  during  the  time  of  their 
captivity;  they  know  the  future,^  whence  they  were  consulted 
about  it  by  the  living.  And  because  this  life  after  death  is  simply 
a  continuation  of  the  life  upon  the  earth,  therefore  it  is  natural  to 
expect  that  the  prophet  should  wear  his  garb  of  distinction,  the 
mantle,  even  in  Sheol.^  Kings  appear  here  with  crowns  and  sit 
upon  thrones,^  the  uncircumcised  retain  their  foreskin,  nations  their 
national  garb  and  customs,^  old  people  their  gray  hair,^  and  those 
slain  with  the  sword  bear  forever  the  tokens   of  a  violent  death.  ^^ 

^  Conf.  for  the  first  two  classes  especially  Cheyne  in  his  Encyclofcedia  Biblica 
sub  "  Eschatology, "  Vol.  II.,  pp.  1340,  1341. 

^Isaiah  14.  ^Lev.  xix.  31.  *Jerem-  xxxi.  15. 

^  I  Sara,  xxviii.  13-20  :  Saul  and  the  witch  of  Endor. 
*^  I  Sam.  xxviii.  14.  ''Is.  xiv.  ^  Ezek-  xxxii. 

^Gen,  xlii.  38.  '"Ezek.  xxxii.  25. 


40  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Cheyne,  no  doubt,  is  right  when  he  calls  this  view  ^^the  older.''  Of  a 
resurrection  we  hear  in  these  passages  not  a  single  word,  although 
they  clearly  prove  that  with  death  life  has  not  come  to  an  end. 

2.  Those  that  express  a  later  idea  and  are  as  such  diametrically 
opposed  to  the  former.  According  to  these,  death  is  destruction,^ 
and  destruction  is  Sheol,^  or  also  called  (the  place  of)  violence,^  a 
place  out  of  which  ^^he  that  goeth  down  shall  come  up  no  more,^'^  a 
place  not  only  where  *' kings,"  "counsellors  of  the  earth,"  and 
**princes"  are  to  be  found,  but  also  where  ^^the  wicked  cease  from 
'troubling,  and  where  ^^the  weary  are  at  rest,''  where  ^^ prisoners  are 
at  ease  together,"  ^'the  small  and  great  are  there,  and  the  servant  is 
free  from  his  master.'^  ^  It  is  indeed  a  place  for  all  classes  and  con- 
ditions of  men  !  There  ^^ Abraham  knoweth  us  not,  and  Israel  doth 
not  acknowledge  us,^'  ^ — the  dead  therefore  have  absolutely  no  knowl- 
edge of  what  is  happening  or  going  on  upon  the  earth  ! 

Especially  important  is  here  the  passage  in  Job  xiv.  7  : 

*'For  there  is  hope  of  a  tree,  if  it  be  cut  down,  that  it  will 
sprout  again, 
And  that  the  tender  branch  thereof  will  not  cease. 
Though  the  root  thereof  was  old  in  the  earth 
And  the  stock  thereof  die  in  the  ground, 
Yet  through  the  scent  of  water  it  will  bud 
And  put  forth  boughs  like  a  plant. 
But  man  dieth,  and  wasteth  away : 
Yea,  man  giveth  up  the  ghost,  and  where  is  he? 
As  the  waters  fail  from  the  sea 
And  the  river  decayeth  and  drieth  up, 
So  man  lieth  down  and  riseth  not: 
Till  the  heavens  be  no  more,  they  shall  not  awake, 
[Nor  be  roused  out  of  their  sleep.] 

What  a  difference  between  Job  and  St.  Paul !  Both  employ 
the  same  method  of  reasoning, — but  how  different  are  the  conclu- 
sions reached.     For  St.  Paul  it  is  just   the  nature  which  proves 

^  Job  xxviii.  22.  ^  job  xxvi.  6.  ^  ^  cxv.  17. 

*Job  vii.  9.  ^Job.  iii.  14  ff,  *  Is.  Ixiii.  16. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  4I 

conclusively  that  there  is  a  resurrection,  but  alas  !  for  Job  the  tree, 
though  the  root  thereof  was  old,  and  the  stock  thereof  die,  will  bud 
again,  but  man  when  he  dieth  will  never  rise  again  !  Two  argu- 
ments, though  both  based  upon  the  phenomena  of  nature,  lead  to 
two  diametrically  opposed  conclusions  !  And  because  there  is  ab- 
solutely no  hope  for  man  after  death,  therefore  argues  Ecclesiastes 
(ix.  5  ff.)  in  his  pessimistic  spirit : 

'^Eat  thy  bread  with  joy,  and  drink  thy  wine  with  a  merry 
heart ;  for  God  hath  already  accepted  thy  works ....  Live 
joyfully  with  the  wife  whom  thou  lovest  all  the  days  of  the 
life  of  thy  vanity,  which  he  hath  given  thee  under  the  sun, 
all  the  days  of  thy  vanity :  for  that  is  thy  portion  in  life,  and 
in  thy  labor  wherein  thou  laborest  under  the  sun.  Whatso- 
ever thy  hand  findeth  to  do,  do  it  with  thy  might ;  for  there 
is  no  work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge,  nor  wisdom,  in  the 
grave,  whither  thou  goeth." 

Dark,  very  dark  is  the  outlook  indeed,  which  men  have  ac- 
cording to  this  view  !  No  life,  no  joy,  no  resurrection  after  death  ! 
With  the  death  everything  comes  to  an  end. 

3.  And  yet,  there  are  some  passages  in  the  Old  Testament 
which  do  indeed  betray  to  us  a  belief  in  a  deliverance  out  of  the 
grave  !  All  these  passages,  however,  belong  to  the  very  latest  por- 
tions of  the  whole  Old  Testament  writings.  Now  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  construe  with  Professor  Gunkel  {Monist,  April,  1903,  p.  487) 
such  sayings  as  meaning  that  "  the  faithful  expects  in  this  connec- 
tion not  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  but  rather  something  very 
different,  namely  that  God  will  save  him  in  present  danger  and  not 
permit  his  soul  to  go  down  into  Sheol  (the  grave).''  This  explana- 
tion might  possibly  hold  good  of  such  passages  as : 

"God  will  redeem  my  soul  from  the  power  of  Sheol"  {y^ 
ixl.  15). 

*'For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  to  Sheol"  (j/^  xvi.  18). 

But  it  never  could  be  applied  to  \\i  xxxvii.  28 : 
'*For  the  Lord  knoweth  judgment 
And  forsaketh  not  the  saints 


42  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

They  are  preserved /?r  ever  (2Tir?) 

But  the  seed  of  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  off." 

This  "for  ever"  clearly  shows  that  the  psalmist  not  only  be- 
lieved that  God  could  and  would  preserve  the  soul  of  the  saints  in 
Present  danger  but  continually,  always  and  always,  for  ever  and  ever, 
unto  all  eternity. 

Meagre  and  few  as  these  passages  are,  yet  they  help  us  to  fol- 
low up  the  path  that  leads  us  to  the  source  whence  such  a  view 
possibly  might  have  been  important.  These  passages,  belonging 
to  the  latest  portions  of  Hebrew  literature,  and  as  such  having 
been  written  after  the  Babylonian  captivity,  point  thus  to  Babylonia 
as  their  source. 

Quite  recently  Zimmern,  in  his  K.  A.  T^.  p.  638  et  passim,  saw 
fit  to  make  the  statement,  "von  einer  Auferstehungslehre  ist  bis 
jetzt  wenigstens  keine  sichere  Spur  in  der  babylonischen  Litteratur 
zu  finden."  That  this  cannot  be  maintained  any  more  now  I  hope 
to  be  able  to  show. 

WEDDING  FESTIVALS  OF  THE  GODS. 
We  have  seen  above  ^  that  Enlil,  the  husband  of  Ninlil,  was 
the  "heaven,'*  while  his  wife  was  "the  earth."  This  "wife"  had 
in  the  three  lists,  transcribed  above,  different  names,  among  which 
there  was  to  be  found  one,  viz.,  dtngtrQ^.ra,  i.  e.,  Muallidtu  or  "the 
one  who  brings  forth," — a  name  which  is  even  found  in  Herodotus 
i.  131,  igg  under  the  form  MvAirra-^  In  our  Creation-Story,  p.  19, 
we  heard  that  the  wife  of  Enlil  had  several  names  even  in  the  oldest 
Sumerian  inscriptions — such  as:  {a)  ^ingirj^in-tu,  i.  e.,  the  divine 
mistress  of  the  TU  or  ^^  bringing  forth''  (=zalddu),  therefore  she  is 
also  called  "the  mother  of  the  gods";  (J))  dingirjsfin-in-si-na,  "the 
mother  of  the  world  (or  people),  who  created  the  creatures  of  the 
world,"  but  especially  {/)  f^^^sirBa-u,  who  as  the  wife  of  Enlil  be- 
comes thus  the  earth.  Now  it  happens  that  we  read  in  several  in- 
scriptions of  Gudea,  the  patesi  of  Shirpurla,  who  lived  at  about 

'See  also  C.  S.  p.  52. 

2  See  also  Jensen,   Kosm.,  pp.  294,  515.     Zimmern,   K.  A.  T^.  pp.  423,  7; 
428.  4. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  43 

3200  B.  C,  of  a  ''wedding"  of  Nin-Girsu,  the  god  of  rain,  thun- 
ders, and  lightnings,  and  dinsir^^a-u^  This  wedding  was  celebrated 
on  the  New- Years-day  of  the  month  called  Ezen-^i^sirBa-u,  i.  e., 
"  the  festival  of  Bau."  The  significance  of  this  wedding-celebra- 
tion becomes  at  once  plain!  //  is  the  fructification  of  the  earth  by 
the  rain  tn  consequence  of  which  the  earth  is  made  pregnant  and  brings 
forth  new  life.  Ba-u  becomes  thus  not  only  an  AM  or  mother,  a 
muallidtUf  one  "that  brings  forth,"  but  also  d.'^i^sirNin-din-dug,'^  z. 
Sumerian  name,  which  when  translated  into  Assyrian  would  be  = 
muballitat  miti,^  i.  e.,  ^Uhe  one  who  quickens  the  dead.''  That  which 
she  quickens,  restores  to  new  life,  are  ^^the  green  things  of  the  earth" 
— hence  the  name  Ba-u,  i.  e.,  ''the  giver  {ba)  of  2/  =  green  things.* 
Such  a  fructification  and  vivification  of  the  earth  can  only  take 
place  in  the  spring.  Hence  during  that  time  which  precedes  the 
spring  the  earth^  as  well  as  Nin-Girsu  must  be  fruitless ,  barren,  or 
dead.  The  time  that  precedes  the  spring  is  the  winter.  In  winter 
then  both  "the  earth"  and  the  "god  of  rain  and  thunder  and  light- 
ning," must  be  dead,  must  lie  in  the  grave.  Now  we  understand 
why  Gudea  records  repeatedly  in  his  inscriptions  that  he  built  for 
Nin-Girsu  in  the  temple  ^-ninnzl-'^^^^^^Im-gig-ghu- bar-bar  also  a  so- 

*  Gudea,  Statue  G.  II,  1-7;  III.  6v.u:  Ud-zag-mu  ezen  <n*^gi^Ba-tl  ni^gYgal- 
gish-sa  ag-da  ;  IV.  18. 

2  If  Ba-u  is  able  to  quicken  the  dead,  then,  of  course,  she  has  the  power  to 
'restore  to  health  the  sick"  also.  Cf.  Craig,  Helig.  Texts,  I.  p.  18,  5-6:  <''«-?»> 
Ba-u  mil  nam-ti-la  shub-ba  shag-gig-ga-ge-=-^^^ ditto  na-da-at  shi-;pat  ba-la(l)-dt 
ana  qi-its  lib-bi,  i.  e.,  "  Bau  who  giveth  the  salvina  of  life  to  the  sick  heart," 

^  This  name  is  also  given  to  the  goddess  Gula — a  name  which  was  originally 
only  an  attribute  of  Ba-u,  and  meaning  as  such  "  the  great  one,"  rabttu,  shurbutu. 
In  the  oldest  texts  Gula  appears  still  used  as  an  attribute,  has  therefore  not  the 
sign  for  god  prefixed  to  it,  see  E.  B.  H.  p.  443. 

^u  in  this  signification  has  according  to  the  syllabaries  (see  Br.  List,  6019, 
6027)  probably  the  pronunciation  SHAM  ;  we  ought  to  read  therefore  Ba-sham. 
This  latter  reading  seems  to  be  implied  also  in  Reisner,  Hymnen,  p.  89,  12  ;  83,  9 
(cf.  1.  28)  :  ugun-m,u  i^i^^^Ba-u-MU,  where  the  MU  can  hardly  be  taken  as  a  pro- 
noun (="my"),  but  where  it  seems  to  contain  the  overhanging  vowel  = -5a- 
sham-mu. 

5  See  here  especially  the  drastic  description  of  the  "  deadness  "  of  nature  while 
Ishtar  (=  Innanna,  another  name  for  Ba-u,  C.  S.  p.  20)  is  in  the  nether  world,  i.  e., 
while  she  is  dead,  barren,  while  it  is  winter  :  Ishtar's  descent,  K.  B,  VI^.  p.  86, 
Rev.  6  ff. 


44  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

called  Gi-gunu^  out  of  cedar-wood.  This  Gi-gunu  appears  in  IV. 
R.  24,  4/^*  not  only  in  parallelism  with  6-kur  and  with  Arallu,  i.e., 
the  ''nether  world,"  but  is  called  there  even  the  ashar  la  naplusi, 
i.  e.,  ^'the  place  of  the  not-seeiiig,  i.  e.,  where  one  does  not  and  can- 
not see  =  the  place  of  darkness.  Nin-Girsu  then  dies  every  year 
and  goes  to  the  Gi-gunu.  Here  he  is  during  the  winter.  In  winter 
he  is  dead :  there  are  no  rains,  thunders,  and  lightnings  at  this 
time  !  But  in  spring  he  is  quickened  and  rises  again,  this  he  indi- 
cates by  his  first  lightnings  and  thunders  that  even  at  our  present 
times  take  place  in  the  early  spring.  As  soon  as  he  is  quickened, 
he  rises  and  marries  the  mother  earth,  i.  e,,  Ba-u :  the  warm  rains 
of  the  spring  unite  themselves  with  the  earth,  who  becomes  preg- 
nant :  in  consequence  of  this  pregnancy  the  dead  things  of  the  earth 
are  quickened,  they  rise  and  new  life  sprouts  !  If  this  wedding  could 
take  place  in  the  spring  only,  and  if  this  was  at  the  same  time  ''the 
New  Year's  day,"  it  follows  that  already  at  Gudea's  time  or  about 
3200  B.  C.  the  year  began  with  the  spring,  with  the  first  of  Nisan, 
the  vernal  equinox,^  and  that  the  wedding  of  Nin-Girsu  and  Ba-u 
is  nothing  but  a  spring  festival  celebrating  the  resurrection  of  nature 
to  new  life  !     It  is  a  Resurrection-festival. 

In  view  of  this  fact  we  now  understand  why  Nin-Girsu  should 
have  become  the  ^^ god  of  vegetation'' :  he  it  is,  who  by  his  fructifica- 
tion of  the  earth  produces  vegetation,  he  is  therefore  the  "god  of 
the  farmers."  That  Nin-Girsu  was  =  Ninib  has  been  recognised 
long  ere  this.  Our  investigations,*  however,  force  us  to  abandon 
the  erroneous  idea  that  Ninib  was  either  the  South  or  Summer  sun^ 
or  the  East  sun.^  Ninib  (because  =  Nin-Girsu)  is  the  god  of  storm, 
rain,  lightnings,  etc.,  as  such  also  a  god  of  vegetation,^  and  a  god 

^SeeE.  B.  H.,  Index,  sub  buildings,  and  Gudea,  Statue  B,  V.  15-19;  Statue 
D,  II.  7-III    I. 

'  See  Jensen,  Kosm.,  p.  185. 

^  This  is  the  answer  to  Zimmern,  K.  A,  T.'  p.  514. 

*  See  also  my  forthcoming  article  on  Jahveh. 

^Winckler,  Geschichte  Israels,  II.,  79.  ^Jensen,  Kosm.,  p  457  f. 

^K.  133  Rev.  20  (A.  S.  K.  T.  p  81):  mit-cha-rish  shumi-shu  im-bu-u  sham-mu 
(=u-mu)  ana  shar-ru-ti-shu-nu  =  with  one  consent  the  plants  called  his  (i.  e.,  Ni- 
nib's)  name  to  a  kingship  over  them. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  45 

of  the  farmers.^  And  just  as  Nin-Girsu  quickens  the  dead,  so  it  is 
said  of  Ninib :  ''Who  has  been  brought  down  into  the  nether 
world,  his  body  thou  bringest  back  again."' 

Nin-Girsu  was  the  ur-sag,  i.  e.,  prime  minister  of  Enlil,  and 
as  in  the  Old  Testament  the  '* angel  of  the  lord"  was  in  course  of 
time  identified  with  '*the  lord,"  so  was  Nin-Girsu,  resp.  Ninib, 
with  Enlil !  So  it  happened  that  when  the  Canaanites  had  invaded 
Babylonia  and  made  themselves  masters  over  it,  Marduk  displaced 
not  only  Enlil  but  also  his  ** prime  minister," — both  of  whose  attri- 
butes and  functions  were  now  attributed  to  him  (i.  e.,  Marduk). 

Marduk's  wife  was  Tsarpanitum,  i.  e.,  ''the  one  who  shines 
(like  silver),"  as  such  she  was  again  identified  with  Ishtar  (=In- 
nanna,  another  name  for  the  wife  of  Enlil).  Now,  it  is  strange  to 
notice  that  the  name  Tsarpanitum  should  have  become,  according 
to  the  folk-etymology,  Zer-bamtu,  i.  e.,  "the  one  who  creates,  pro- 
duces, seed  ! "  That  this  must  have  had  a  reason  is,  of  course,  evi- 
dent !     And  what  is  the  reason? 

The  spring-festival  of  the  resurrection  of  nature,  which  was 
conceived  to  be  (at  the  time  of  Gudea)  a  wedding  of  Nin-Girsu 
and  Ba-u,  was  transferred  to  Marduk  who  now  took  the  highest 
place  in  the  Babylonian  pantheon, — it  became  a  wedding  ^  of  Mar- 
duk and  Tsarpanitu,  which  wedding  likewise  took  place  in  the 
spring,  in  Nisan.  This  event  was  also  considered  to  be  a  tabu^  or 
resurrection  of  Marduk  and  the  beginning  oi  his  ^^kingship'^^  w^ovi 
earth.  These  facts  alone  help  us  considerably  to  explain  more 
fully  the  nature  of  god  Marduk.  Marduk  begins  his  reign,  his  king- 
ship in  the  spring.  What  precedes  the  spring  is  again  the  winter. 
In  winter,  then,  Marduk  has  no  kingship, — he  \?>  powerless.     In  the 

^  Cf .  here  Engar  =  ikkaru  =  farmer  ;  and  rf'«^'>  Engar  = »'«  Ninib.  See  also 
p.  i6,  note  8. 

2  King,  Magic,  No.  2,  2i  :  sha  ana  araJU  shUrudu  ^agarshu  tuterra! 

^  I-chi-ish  ana  cha-da-ash-shu-tu,  i.  e.,  he  [5^:.  Marduk]  hastened  to  the  bride- 
ship.     Reisner,  Hymnen,  p.  145,  8. 

*Neb.  VII.  24  ;  Nerigl.  I.  35  ;  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI. 1  p.  306  ;  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T.^ 
P-  371- 

^Ir-mu-u  ana  sharru-u-tu,  i.  e.,  he  sat  down  for  the  kingship.  Reisner,  loc 
cit.,  1.  9. 


46  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Spring  he  rises ^  during  the  winter  he  must  be  in  the  grave ^  must  be 
dead.  In  the  spring  he  ''hastens  to  the  brideship,"  i.  e.,  he  weds, 
he  unites  himself  with  Tsarpanitu.  The  result  of  this  is  again  that 
Tsarpanitu  becomes  a  mother,  is  fructified  and  vivified, — hence  the 
Tsarpanitu  becomes  a  Zer-banitu,  as  such  she  brings  forth  seed. 
This  she  does  because  she  takes  the  place  of  Ba-u  or  Ishtar  (=In- 
nanna),  the  earth !  The  earth  by  wedding  Marduk  is  made  to  pro- 
duce the  ''green  things  of  nature,"  and  Marduk,  who  causes  all 
this,  is  therefore  called  sha  miti  bulluta  irammu,^  i.  e.,  he  "who 
delights  in  quickening  the  dead," — therefore  he  has  the  name  bel 
balati,2  "the  lord  of  life."  These  ''dead,''  whom  Marduk  quickens 
can  therefore  be  primarily  only  =  "the  dead  things  of  nature,'"  ^  but 
came  to  include,  because  man  is  a  part  of  nature,  "mankind"  also. 
In  another  place*  I  have  shown  that  Marduk  was  the  god  of  light, 
— the  light  considered,  however,  not  as  an  illuminating  power,  but 
as  a  /ife-giving  -princ'i-ple.  Marduk,  the  AMAR-UD,  i.  e.,  "the  son 
of  the  sun,"  if  he  were  an  illuminator  only,  could  never  be  called 
"dead"  or  "powerless"  during  the  winter.  The  ''rays  of  the  sun" 
— for  these  are  Marduk — are  dead  or  powerless  in  the  winter,  be- 
cause they  do  not  give  warmth.^  Marduk,  the  god  of  light,  becomes 
thus  the  god  of  the  warmth  of  the  spring,'^  because  in  the  spring, 
when  he  is  quickened  again  and  rises,  when  he  begins  his  "king- 
ship" and  enters  into  a  wedlock  with  mother  earth,  the  rays  of  the 
sun  become  to  be  felt,'^ — his  power   begins,  the  earth  is  fructified. 


^Zimmern,  Shurfu,  VII.  84.  2  ^immern,  Shurpu,  VIII.  71. 

3  Against  Zimmern,  K.  A.  T.^  pp.  373,  639,  who  thinks  that  miti  here  =  Tot- 
kranke,  Schwerkranke.     But  the  I'Tl^iTD  never  means  sick,  but  dead  only  \ 

*C.  S.  p.  5  f.  ^Monist,  XII.,  572;  see  also  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI. ^  p.  563,  cf. 
ibid.,  p.  562,  and  Jastrow,  feivish  Quarterly  J^evzezu,  1901,  p.  638, — both  these 
scholars  have  drawn  my  attention  to  these  places. 

5  This  against  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI.^  p.  563. 

*  The  idea  that  Marduk  be  the  god  of  the  early  sun  either  of  the  day,  or  of  the 
spring,  or  "at  the  beginning"  when  the  world  was  created,  ought  now  to  be  given 
up  once  for  all,  seeing  that  even  the  originator  of  the  same,  Professor  Jensen,  has 
himself  abandoned  it. 

■^  In  the  winter  they  are  7iot  felt,  although  the  sun  is  shining  :  Marduk  is  in 
the  grave,  is  powerless,  is  dead,  and  is  as  such  called  Nabu  !  M?.rduk  and  Nabd 
represent  thus  the  two  halves  of  the  year  :  summer  and  winter  ! 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  47 

brings  forth  fruit  :  the  dead  things  of  the  earth  are  quickened,  rise  to 
new  life.  The  fight  of  Marduk  against  Tiamat  appears  thus  as  a 
fight  of  the  Hght,  i.  e.,  the  warmth  (the  summer  beginning  with  the 
spring)  against  the  darkness,  i.  e.,  the  cold  (the  winter,  chaos, 
when  everything  is  barren,  dead),  which  fight  took  place  not  only 
*'in  the  beginning"  on  ''the  first  spring,"  but  which  repeats  itself 
every  year  and  which  will  go  on  ach-ra-tash  nishi  la-ba-rish  ume^^j^ 
— for  all  eternity,  for  ever  and  ever.  After  having  overcome  his 
enemy,  the  winter,  and  thus  made  the  creation  possible,  Marduk 
receives  the  highest  honor  which  a  god  can  or  may  receive  :  he  is 
henceforth  called  by  the  name  of  that  ancient  Sumerian  god,  viz., 
En-lU,  the  ''king  and  father  of  the  gods,"  the  "king  of  the  lands, "^ 
as  such  a  "king"  he  also  has  the  life  and  death  of  his  people  in 
his  hands.  He  can  now  determine  their  fates,  he  is  a  mushim  shi- 
mati. 

This  latter  point  leads  us  over  to  another  important  event 
which  took  place  in  connection  with  this  New  Year's  festival. 

The  resurrection  of  Marduk  was  celebrated  by  the  people  in 
this  way : 

Just  as  Marduk  left  the  nether  world — a  place  within  the  earth 
— so  his  statue  left  or  went  out  (atsi^)  of  the  temple  Esagil  and  was 
wheeled  around  on  a  ship^  in  solemn  procession  {mashdachu).  This 
"wheeling  around"  took  place  on  the  most  celebrated  street  in 
Babylon,  the  street  Ai-ibur-shabum,  i.  e.,  probably,  "not  shall  the 
dark  one  gain  victory."*  Especially  sacred  during  this  festival 
were  the  eighth  to  the  tenth  day,  on  which  Marduk  as  the  highest 
and  as  the  spokesman  of  all  the  other  great  gods  "determines  the 
fates "  of  mankind  in  a  place  called  Du-azag^  which  again  was  in 
another  called  Ubshugina.  See  here  especially  K.  B.  III.  2  p.  15  ff. 
(=Neb.  II.  54.): 

1  K.  B.  VI. 1  p.  36,  10  f.  2K.  B.  VI. 1  p.  36.  13. 

3  That  is :  the  ceremonies  connected  with  this  festival  were  such  that  went 
against  ' '  the  common  order  of  things, " — it  was  a  festival  ' '  der  ausgelassensten 
Freude,"  where  everything  went  "upside  down,  the  veriest  car-nevar'(Winckler). 

* Sh^bft  not  =  "enemy  "  as  Del,  H.  W.  B.  p.  637  wants,  see  Jensen,  K.  B.  VI. ^ 
335.  The  "dark  one"  is  the  "death,"  "winter,"  "chaos,"  "darkness,"  Tiamat, 
etc. 


48  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

Du-azag,  the  "place  of  the  destiners  of  fate,"  which  is  (in) 
Ub-shu-gin-na,  the  chamber  of  fates  (=the  room  where  judgment 
is  given!),  where  at  (the  time  of)  the  ZAG-MU-KU,  the  "New- 
Year,"  on  the  eighth  (to  the)  eleventh  day  the  "king  of  the  gods 
of  heaven  and  earth,"  the  "lord  of  the  gods,"  takes  his  abode 
(=sits  down  sc.  for  judgment),  and  where  he,  while  the  gods  of 
heaven  and  earth  reverently  listen  (?)  and  stand,  doing  homage  to 
him,  determines  a  fate  of  eternal  days  (to  be)  the  fate  of  my  life.^ 

Du-azag  means  "bright  or  holy  hill,"  and  Ubshugina  the  "room 
of  the  assembling  hand"^ — we  have,  then,  here  a  larger  place  within 
which  there  is  a  "hill."  On  this  hill  the  great  gods  are  assembled 
and  determine  under  the  presidency  of  Marduk  the  fates  of  man- 
kind. Whatever  may  be  the  outcome  of  this  shimtu  shimu,  this 
"determining  of  fates,"  Marduk  declares  it;  he  appears  thus  as  a 
"herald"  who  although  the  highest  god  acts  only  with  the  consent 
of  the  other  great  gods  ! 

Taking  all  these  facts  into  consideration,  the  sequence  of  the 
events,  connected  with  this  New- Year's  festival,  has  probably  to  be 
conceived  of  as  follows  : 

1.  During  the  winter  Marduk  is  powerless,  i.  e.,  dead. 

2.  In  the  spring  or  in  Nisan,  which  is  the  beginning  of  the 
New  Year,  Marduk  enters  upon  his  kingship  again,  i.  e.,  he  acquires 
new  power,  new  life ;  is  quickened. 

3.  As  soon  as  he  is  quickened  he  rises — his  quickening  and  his 
resurrection  practically  fall  together. 

^  Du-azag  ki-nam-tar-tar-e-ne  \ 

sha  Uh-shu-(u)gin-na  farah  shi-ma-a-ti 
sha  ina  ZA  G-MU-KU  ri-esh  sha-at-ti 
Hmu  Vlllff^^  Hmu  Xlkam 
dimmer Lugal-dim-me-ir-an-ki- a  hel  ih 
i-ra-am-mu-u  ki-ri-ib-shu 
ildni  shu-ut  shame  irtsiti 
^a-al-chi-ish  u-ta-ak-ku-shu 
ka-am  su  in-za-zu  mach-ru-ush-shu 
shi-ma  at  ii-um  da-er-u-tim 
shi-ma-at  ba-la-ti-ia 
i-shi-im-mu  i-na  ki-ir-bi. 
2  Jensen,  Kosm  ,  p.  240.  translates  this  name  by  "  Raum  der  Versammlung,' 
but  in  this  translation  the  shu  is  not  accounted  for. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  49 

4.  Having  thus  been  quickened  and  having  risen,  he  unites 
himself  with  mother  earth. 

5.  This  union  makes  the  earth  "give  up  her  dead" — the  resur- 
rection of  nature  is  thus  conditioned  by  Marduk's  resurrection — if 
Markuk  had  not  risen,  nature  (vegetation)  could  not  rise  to  new 
life  ! 

6.  Marduk  as  the  victor  and  conqueror  of  darkness  enters  in 
solemn  procession  the  '*holy  hill"  within  the  ''room  of  the  assem- 
bling hand"  and  determines  here  in  the  name  of  all  the  other  great 
gods  the  fates  of  mankind. 

This  festival  of  the  resurrection  of  Marduk  and  that  of  nature 
was  celebrated  every  Nisan  while  the  Jews  were  in  the  Babylonian 
captivity.  Surely  we  must  suppose  that  this  spring-festival  was 
known  to  the  returning  Jews,  if  we  do  not  want  to  maintain  that 
they  were  dead,  absolutely  dead,  to  their  surroundings.  We  saw 
above  that  we  could  detect  in  the  Old  Testament  at  least  some 
meagre  relics  of  a  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  which  doctrine, 
however,  in  the  New  Testament  holds  almost  the  same  place  as  it 
did  in  ancient  Babylonia. 

THE  RESURRECTION  OF  CHRIST. 

As  Marduk  had  displaced  old  Enlil  and  his  messenger,  so 
Christ  displaced  Marduk.  Marduk  is  the  god  of  light — and  Christ 
is  the  ''light  of  the  world,"  he  was  therefore  made  to  have  been 
born  on  the  25th  of  December — the  festival  of  light — when  the  days 
begin  to  lengthen  again  and  thus  save  the  world  from  falling  into 
utter  darkness.  Marduk  was  the  light  as  a  "life-giving  principle," 
he  died,  and  was  in  the  grave  during  three  double-months,^  but 
rose  again  in  the  spring,  on  the  first  of  Nisan,  when  he  acquired 
new  life,  new  strength,  new  power,  and  entered  into  a  wedlock 
with  mother  earth,  his  wife,  i.  e.,  with  Tsarpanitum  or  Ishtar. 
Christ,  too,  died,  and  was  put  into  the  grave,  where  he  was  for 
three  days,  but  had  to   rise  again  on  Easter — the  festival  of  Ishtar. ^ 

^  I.  e.,  during  the  six  months  of  the  winter. 

2  Easter  and  Ishtar  are  one  and  the  same  word.     It  has  come  into  the  English 
language  from  the  Germans,  who  worshipped  the  goddess  Ostara.     This  Ostara 


50  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

By  his  resurrection  he  demonstrated  that  he,  like  Marduk,  had 
overcome  the  powers  of  darkness  (=  the  old  dragon,  the  serpent !) 
and  had  entered  upon  his  kingly  rulership,  and  thus  became  the 
bel  balati,  ''the  lord  of  life."  Marduk,  however,  not  only  rose  him- 
self, but  forced  by  entering  into  wedlock  with  mother  earth,  this 
latter  to  give  up  her  dead.  Thus  also  Christ,  if  he  really  wanted  to 
show  that  there  began  with  his  resurrection  also  his  kingly  rulership 
upon  earth,  had  to  force  the  earth  to  give  up  her  dead — therefore  it 
is  said  * : 

''And  behold,  the  veil  of  the  temple  was  rent  in  twain 
from  the  top  to  the  bottom,  and  the  earth  did  quake;  and 
the  rocks  were  rent ;  and  the  tombs  were  opened  ;  and  many 
bodies  of  the  saints  that  had  fallen  asleep  were  raised,    and 
coming  forth  out  of  the  tombs  after  his  resurrection  ^  they 
entered  into  the  holy  city  and  appeared  unto  many  ! " 
This  passage  proves,  more  than  anything  else,  that  there  was 
transferred  to  Christ  all  that  originally  belonged  to  Marduk  !     Al- 
though we  hear  in  these  verses  of  all  the  circumstances  connected 
with  the  death  of  Christ  yet  it  said  that  "many  bodies  of  the  saints 
were  raised,  and  coming  forth  out  of  the  tombs  after  his  resurrec- 
tion they  entered  the  holy  city  !     According  to  Babylonian  ideas 
there  never  could  come  forth  the  dead  out  of  the  earth  at  the  death 
of  Marduk.     Matthew  wanting  to  record  the  terrible  earthquake  in 
connection   with    Christ's    death — an    earthquake   so  terrible   that 
even  the  graves  were  opened — feels  that  it  was  impossible  to  say 
that  the  "saints"  rose  while  their  life-giver  was  dead — hence  he 
makes  the  addition   ^^ after  his  resurrection.'""     With  Marduk's  res- 
urrection the  resurrection  of  the  dead  was  given,  the  dead  could 
not  rise  if  Marduk  had  not  risen  first — hence  Matthew's  statement: 
the  dead  rose  after  his,  i.  e. ,  Christ's  resurrection  !     Christ  had  to 

was  brought  to  the  Germans  from  the  Greeks,  among  whom  the  goddess  Aphrodite, 
=  Astarte,  plays  the  same  role  as  does  among  the  Germans  the  goddess  Ostara. 
This  Aphrodite  was  called  by  Herodotus  (see  above)  MvA^rra  and  thus  identified 
with  the  Hebrew  Ashtoreh,  who  again  is  the  Semitic-Babylonian  Ishtar,  and  this 
the  Tsarpanitu  resp.  Innanna  or  Bau  ! 

^Matth.  xxvii.  53. 

2  /cat  l^tW&VTt^  etc  royv  fivijfieiuv  fierd  r^  tyepaiv  avrov  ei^Wov  elf  tj^  dylav  irdTuv. 


BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  5I 

rise  first — if  Christ  did  not  rise,  then  the  dead  could  not  rise. ' 
Neither  could  Christ  rise  alone,  the  earth  had  to  give  up  her  dead ! 
And  what  a  difference  there  is  between  this  statement  of  Matthew 
and  the  reasoning  of  St.  Paul !  According  to  Paul,  Christ  did  rise, 
because  the  dead  rise,  and  the  dead  rise  because  nature  proves  it 
that  there  is  a  resurrection  every  spring.  Matthew's  conception  of 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  is  more  in  accord  with  the  teachings  of 
the  Babylonian  religion. 

Marduk  after  his  quickening  and  resurrection  enters  in  solemn 
procession  the  <* holy  hill"  within  the  Ubshugina  and  "determines 
the  fates  of  mankind."  Christ,  too,  after  his  being  quickened  sets 
out  on  a  journey  to  the  so-called  <j>vXaKT^,  the  great  ''keeping-place." 
That  this  latter  cannot  be  the  ''nether  world"  as  such,  but  must  be 
=  the  Ubshugina,  the  "room  of  the  assembling  hand,"  seems  evi- 
dent enough.  Christ  as  well  as  Marduk  were  in  the  nether  world 
while  they  were  dead,  while  lying  in  the  grave,  i.  e.,  during  the  thre-e 
double-months  of  the  winter,  resp.  the  t/iree  days  that  preceded 
Christ's  quickening.  During  these  days  Christ's  body  was  sepa- 
rated from  the  soul, — the  former  being  in  the  tomb,  the  latter  con- 
tinuing to  live  as  an  utukku,  resp.  eki'mmu,  i.  e. — according  to  the 
New  Testament  usus  loquendi — as  a  "spirit."  After  these  three 
days,  i.  e.,  after  the  time  of  Christ's  being  in  the  lower  world,  he 
goes  to  the  "prison"  not  only  as  a  "spirit"  but  as  a  "spirit  re- 
united to  its  body,"  i.  e.,  as  a  quickened  one.  If  this  "prison"  were 
the  "nether  world,"  we  would  necessarily  have  to  postulate  two 
descents  to  Hades, — one  while  he  was  dead,  the  other  while  he 
was  alive,  quickened.  Besides  this,  if  Christ  went  to  the  "prison" 
as  a  quickened  one,  and  if  this  latter  (the  prison)  was  the  nether 
world,  then  the  question  would  have  to  be  answered,  where  was 
Christ's  body,  where  was  his  soul  during  the  three  days  of  his 
death?  We  see,  these  difficulties  force  us  to  maintain  the  identity 
of  the  "keeping-place"  or  "prison"  with  the  "room  of  the  assem- 
bling hand."  Marduk  "determines  here  the  fates  of  mankind," 
and  Christ  "heralds"  something, — that  this  heralding  or  preaching 
could  not  have  been  a  "  proclamation  of  the  Gospel,''  we  saw  above; 
hence  the  heralding  can  be  only  a  proclamation  of  the  fates  of  the 


52  BEL,  THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

''spirits"  in  prison.  Christ  appears  here  like  Marduk  as  one  ''who 
determines  the  fates."  If  this  be  true,  then  we  may  also  venture 
to  decide  the  exact  nature  of  the  Ubshugina,  resp.  the  prison.  The 
Ubshugina  is  never  identified,  as  far  as  I  know,  with  the  Babylo- 
nian Hades.  Taking  all  the  places  in  consideration  where  we  hear 
something  about  the  Ubshugina,  we  may  say  at  the  present ^  this 
much :  It  is  a  room  in  the  temple  of  Marduk.  This  temple  of  Mar- 
duk called  Esagila  represents  as  each  and  every  temple  does  "the 
world"  or  "cosmos,"  hence  Ubshugina  must  represent  also  a  cos- 
mic quantity  and  as  such  be  situated  in  the  Cosmos.  In  the  Ub- 
shugina the  Anunnaki  are  said  to  live.  The  Anunnaki,  however, 
play  an  important  role  in  the  "judgment"  of  the  departed  souls. 
Hence  the  Ubshugina  is  the  "place  or  room  in  which  the  souls  of 
the  departed  are  assembled  "  and  where  judgment  is  passed  upon 
them.  This  "judgment"  is  given  by  the  great  gods  under  the 
presidency  of  Marduk,  who  are  therefore  likewise  assembled  in  the 
Ubshugina.  While  the  gods  thus  "determine"  what  shall  be  done 
with  this  or  that  soul,  they  sit  on  the  Du-azag^  or  "  holy  hill "  which 
likewise  is  to  be  found  in  the  Ubshugina.  After  the  judgment  has 
been  passed,  the  "souls"  are  dismissed  to  the  nether  world  proper, 
where  they  enjoy,  resp.  do  not  enjoy  their  fates.  The  Ubshugina, 
therefore,  as  well  as  the  "prison,"  is  the  Judgment  hall^  for  the  de- 
parted spirits,  and  is  as  such  situated  likewise  in  the  cosmos,  more 
especially  in  the  earth,  and  clearly  distinct  from  the  nether  world. 
Christ  as  well  as  Marduk,  after  having  overcome  the  powers 
of  darkness,  and  thus  shown  that  they  have  power  over  life  and 
death,  take  upon  themselves  instantly  the  functions  of  the  highest 
fudge  J  by  "determining  the  fates."  But  not  only  this  is  their  only 
reward:  Marduk  was  made  the  highest  god  and  called  ^^En-lil of 
the  gods,''  thus  practically  put  at  the  head  of  all  the  other  gods,  so 
also  Christ, — he  was  seated 

^  See  also  my  forthcoming  article  on  Jahveh,  and  cf.  Jensen,  Kosmologie,  p. 
239  ff- 

^  See  Jensen,  Kosmologie,  p.  234  £f. 

^  uh-shu-ukin-na-ki  ki-sal fuchur  ildni^"f^  a-shar  di-e-ni,  K.  8830,  1.  4,  cited 
by  Pinches,  P.  S.  B.  A.,  1894,  p.  229,  note. 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  53 

*'on  the  right  hand  of  God,  having  gone  into  heaven;  an- 
gels and  authorities  and  powers — i.  e.,  the  whole  heavenly 
world — being  made  subject  unto  him"  (i  Peter  iii.  21). 
Our  investigations  will  have  shown  us,  I  hope,  the  following : 
The  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  was  known  in  Babylonia  as 
early  as  3200  B.  C,  at  which  time  there  was  celebrated  a  spring- 
festival.  This  spring-festival  was  a  marriage  between  ''the  rains 
of  the  spring"  and  ''mother  earth."  In  consequence  of  this  mar- 
riage the  earth  became  a  mother  and  brought  forth  in  due  time 
"the  green  things  of  the  earth":  the  vegetation.  These  "green 
things  of  the  earth  "  as  well  as  mother  earth  and  the  god  of  rain 
were  also  considered  to  be  "dead  during  the  winter,'" — Nin-Girsu 
therefore  had  a  tomb  or  burial-place,  the  Gi-gunu,  for  his  abode  du- 
ring the  time  of  his  "death."  This  was  again  based  upon  the  com- 
mon phenomena  of  nature :  during  the  winter  there  are  no  rains, 
no  thunders,  no  lightnings, — hence  Nin-Girsu  must  be  dead.  In 
the  spring,  however,  with  the  first  rolling  of  the  thunders,^  the 
people  gathered  that  Nin-Girsu  has  been  quickened  again  !  Very 
soon  there  appeared  also  the  first  rains  of  the  spring,  who  fructified 
the  earth.  As  Nin-Girsu  is  not  only  the  god  of  the  thunder  and 
lightning,  but  also  that  of  the  rain,  this  "raining  upon  the  earth" 
was  considered  to  be  a  marriage  between  the  "god  of  the  rain" 
and  the  "goddess  of  the  earth."  The  resurrection  of  nature  has 
thus  two  causes :  the  vivification  or  quickening  of  the  god  of  rain 
(and  mother  earth)  and  the  marriage  relation  between  Nin-Girsu 
and  Ba-u.  No  wonder,  then,  that  even  at  our  present  times  this 
latter  aspect  should  play  such  an  important  role  at  Easter,  the  feS' 
tival  of  the  Ishtar,  i.  e.,  the  goddess  of  love\ 

At  the  time  when  Marduk  was  introduced  into  the  Babylonian 
pantheon,  these  two  aspects,  i.  e.,  the  quickening  and  the  marriage 
— were  retained,  only  the  names  of  the  parties  concerned  were 
changed :  Nin-Girsu,  the  god  of  rain,  became  Marduk,  the  god  of 
light,  and  Ba-ti  became  Tsarpanitum  or  Ishtar.     Besides  these  two 

^  Mathew's  statement  about  the  earthquake  in  connection  with  the  death  of 
Christ  ought  to  have  occurred  at  his  (Christ's)  resurrection  !  Cf .  the  remarkable 
addition  ''after  his  resurrection  "  ! 


54  BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES. 

ancient  features  there  was  introduced  a  third  one.  The  new  life  of 
the  nature  was  not  merely  considered  to  be  the  result  of  a  quicken- 
ing and  a  marriage^  but  they  were  made  dependent  also  upon  2.  pre- 
ceding fight.  The  Canaanites  before  they  could  think  of  mastering 
the  whole  of  Babylonia  had  first  of  all  to  fight,  subdue  their  ene- 
mies. Marduk  being  their  god,  becomes  thus  the  god  who  sub- 
dues his  enemies.  And  as  he  subdued  them  once,  so  he  always 
has  and  will  continue  to  subdue  them  for  all  eternity.  Marduk 
subdued  Babylonia,  conquered  his  enemies  who  lived  there  before 
him.  With  this  subjugation  the  ''new  life,"  the  new  forms  and 
governments  of  Babylonia  were  made  possible.  For  these  con- 
quering Canaanites,  Babylonia  became  the  ''world,"  k^t  i$oxnv,  and 
Marduk  their  god,  Kar  Itoxqv.  Just  as  Marduk  conquered  the  ene- 
mies of  Babylonia,  so  he  also  must  have  conquered  the  old,  old 
enemy  of  the  "world," — the  Tiamat,  or  chaos;  just  as  with  the 
subjugation  of  his  Babylonian  enemies  the  new  life  and  develop 
ment  of  "Babylonia"  were  made  possible,  so  also  was  with  his 
conquering  Tiamat  the  life  and  development  of  the  "world."  Mar- 
duk means  according  to  his  name  AMAR-UD=  "son  of  the  sun," 
and  is,  therefore,  a  god  of  light,  hence  if  he  be  the  light,  then  his 
enemy  can  be  only  the  darkness.  Marduk's  fight  becomes  thus  a 
fight  of  the  light  against  the  darkness y — after  having  overcome  the 
darkness  the  creation  of  the  world  is  possible.  But  Marduk  is  not 
a  "light"  because  it  illuminates  but  because  it  warms,  gives  life, 
hence  his  enemy,  the  darkness,  must  be  the  winter  !  The  fight  of 
Marduk  and  Tiamat  thus  repeats  itself  yearly :  it  is  the  fight  of  the 
**rays  0/ the  sun^'  in  the  spring  against  the  cold\  The  "rays  of  the 
sun"  gain  in  this  fight  the  victory:  the  cold,  the  darkness  is  over- 
come, a  new  order  of  things  is  now  initiated,  the  earth  is  forced  to 
give  up  her  dead,  new  life  sprouts,  the  resurrection  takes  place  ! 

Again  a  change  of  names  takes  place — but  only  of  names  \  Mar- 
duk becomes  Christ,  Tiamat  ="M<f  old  serpent,  the  dragon,'^  and 
Tsarpanitum  or  Ishtar  =  who?  According  to  analogy,  Christ  also 
ought  to  marry — an  idea  almost  obliterated,  but  still  preserved  in 
allusions  to  the  bride  of  the  lamb,  the  personification  of  the  Church. 

Just  as  Marduk  conquered  the  primeval  dragon,  Tiamat,  and 


BEL,   THE  CHRIST  OF  ANCIENT  TIMES.  55 

created  the  world,  so  Christ  had  to  create  the  world;  just  as  Mar- 
duk  rose  as  the  god  of  light  every  spring,  and  married  Ishtar  or 
the  earth,  and  fructified  and  vivified  her,  by  means  of  which  she 
begat  children  ox  produced  new  life,  so  did  Christ  because  he  too  is 
the  light.  He  did  rise  because  he  was  =  Marduk.  Marduk  is  the 
author  not  only  of  the  first  creation  but  of  every  new  creation,  so  is 
Christ :  only  in  and  through  Christ  men  do  rise.  Marduk  in  conse- 
quence of  his  victory  over  the  dragon  was  exalted,  and  received  the 
name  of  Enlil,  the  ^'father  and  god  of  the  gods,^^  the  ^^  god  of  heciven 
and  earthy'^  the  Bel  ox  Lord,  Kar  i^oxrjv,  so  Christ  was  taken  up  into 
the  heavens  and  enthroned  on  "the  right  hand  of  God,"  for  "God 
highly  exalted  him,  and  gave  unto  him  the  name  which  is  above  every 
name  {l);  that  in  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,  of 
things  in  heaven  and  things  on  earth,  and  things  under  the  earth, 
and  that  every  tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Lord\^ 
Our  Easter-festival  is  the  old,  old  spring-festival,  celebrating 
the  resurrection  of  nature,  made  possible  by  the  victory  of  the  spring 
over  the  winter.  Nature  does  indeed  rise,  man  is  a  part  of  nature, 
Christ  is  man,  therefore  Christ  did  rise  !  And  the  risen  Christ  is 
the  Bel,  the  Lord\ 

1  Phil.  ii.  9  if. 


Religions ;  Ancient  and  Modern 

The  Series  is  intended  to  present  to  a  large  public  the  salient  fea- 
tures of  the  Great  Religions  of  the  Human  Race.  The  Volumes 
already  published  have  met  with  the  most  gratifying  appreciation. 

Fcap.  8vo.      Cloth,  40  cents  net  per  volume 


Animism. 

By  Edward  Clodd 

Pantheism. 

By  James  Allanson  Picton 

Celtic  Religion. 

By  Prof.  Anwyl 

Mythology  of  Ancient 
Britain  and  Ireland. 

By  Charles  Squire 

Ancient  Egypt. 

By  Prof.  W.  M. 

Flinders  Petrie 

Scandinavian  Religion. 

By  W.  a.  Craigie 

Magic  and  Fetishism. 

By  Dr.  A.  C.  Haddon 


NOW     PUBLISHED 

Hinduism. 


By  Dr.  L.  D.  Barnett 

Ancient  China. 

By  Prof.  Giles 

Ancient  Greece. 

By  Jane  Harrison 

Babylonia  and  Assyria 

By  Theophilus  G.  Pinches 

Islam. 

By  Syed  Ameer  ali,  m.  a. 

Religion  of  Ancient  Rome. 

By  Cyril  Bailey,  m.  a. 

Judaism. 

By  Israel  Abrahams 

Shinto:  The  Ancient 

Religion  of  Japan. 
By  W.  G.  Aston,  c.  m.  g  ,  ll.  d. 


IN     PREPARATION 

The  Religion  of  Ancient  Israel.     By  Prof.  Jastrow 

The  Religion  of  Ancient  Mexico  and  Peru.     By  Lewis  Spence 

Islam   in   India.      By  T.  W.  Arnold,  Assistant  Librarian   at  the  India  Office. 
Author  of  **The  Preaching  of  Islam." 

Buddhism.      2  vols.      By  Professor  T.  W.  Rhys  Davids,  LL.  D. 

The  Religion  of  Ancient  Persia.     By  Dr.  A.  V.  Williams  Jackson, 
Professor  of  Iranian  at  Columbia  University. 

Primitive  or  Nicene  Christianity.     By  John  Sutherland  Black,  LL.  D., 
Joint  Editor  of  the  « 'Encyclopaedia  Biblica." 

Mediaeval  Christianity, 

The  Psychology  of  Religion. 


By  Dr.  Leuba. 


The   Open   Court  Publishing   Co. 

jy8-j88    Wabash  Avenue       ::       Chicago 


Zarathushtra,  Philo,  the 
Achaemenids,  and  Israel 

Being  a  "treatise  upon  the  Antiquity  and  Influence  of  the  Avesta^  for 
the  most  part  delivered  as  University  Lectures. 

By  Dr.  Lawrence  H.  Mills,  Professor  of  Zend  Philology  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  Translator  of  the  Thirty-first  Volume  of  the 
Sacred  Books  of  the  East,  Author  of  the  Five  Zarathushtrian  Gathas, 
etc.  Part  i. — Zarathushtra  and  the  Greeks.  Part  II. — Zar- 
ATHtJSHTRA,  THE  AcHAEMENiDS  AND  IsRAEL.  Composed  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  Trustees  of  the  Sir  J.  Jejeebhoy  Translation  Fund  of 
Bombay.  8vo.  Pp.  xiii,  208;  xiv,  252,  two  parts  in  one  volume, 
cloth,  gilt  top,  ^4,00  net. 

Shortly  before  the  death  of  Professor  Jaines  Darmesteter,  of  Paris,  the  great 
authority  on  the  * 'Zend-Avesta, "  he  surprised  the  general  public  by  changing  his 
views  concerning  the  antiquity  of  the  Zoroastrian  literature,  maintaining  that  the 
"Gathas"  were  largely  influenced  by  the  v^^ritings  of  Philo,  and  w^ere  written  about 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.  This  change  of  view  on  his  part  led  the  Parsees 
of  India  to  engage  Dr.  Mills  to  write  a  book  upon  the  great  antiquity  of  the  **  A  vesta." 
After  several  vears  of  continuous  devotion  to  the  subject,  the  present  volume  is  put 
forth  as  the  result,  and  it  amply  meets  all  expectations.  The  antiquity  of  the  Zoro- 
astrian literature  is  succesifiiiiy  maintained,  and  in  such  a  manner  that  ordinary  readers 
can  appreciate  the  argument. 

**The  Avesta  in  no  sense  depends  upon  the  Jewish  Greeks.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  was  Philo  who  was  in  debt  to  it.  He  drank  in  his  Iranian  lore  from  the 
pgiges  of  his  exilic  Bible,  or  from  the  Bible-books  which  were  then  as  yet  detached, 
and  which  not  only  recorded  Iranian  edicts  by  Persian  Kings,  but  were  themselves 
half  made  up  of  ]e wish- Persian  history.  Surely  it  is  singular  that  so  many  of  us  who 
*  search  the  scriptures*  should  be  unwilling  to  see  the  first  facts  which  stare  at  us  from 
its  lines.  The  religion  of  those  Persians,  which  saved  our  own  from  an  absorption 
(in  the  Babylonian),  is  portrayed  in  fiill  and  brilliant  colors  in  the  Books  of  the  Avesta, 
because  the  Avesta  is  only  the  expansion  of  the  Religion  of  the  sculptured  edicts  as 
modified.  The  very  by- words,  as  we  shall  later  see,  are  strikingly  the  same,  and  these 
inscriptions  are  those  of  the  very  men  who  wrote  the  Bible  passages.  This  religion  of 
the  Restorers  was  beyond  all  question  historically  the  first  consistent  form  in  which  our 
own  Eschatology  appeared'*  (pt.  i.  pp.  206-207). 

The  conclusions  come  with  great  force  in  support  of  the  genuineness  and 
authenticity  of  the  biblical  references  to  Cyrus  in  the  Old  Testament.  Students  of  the 
literature  of  the  Captivity  will  find  the  volume  invaluable.  The  facts  now  brought  to 
Hght  are  such  as  the  literary  critics  cannot  afford  to  neglect. 

The  Open  Court  Publishing  Co* 

378  Wabash  Avenue,  Chicago 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  ot  any 
University  of  California  Library 
or  to  the 
NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
BIdg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4 
days  prior  to  due  date. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


UUN  0  8  2001 


nr.T  ft  ft  gQ(g 


12,000(11/95) 


U.  C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CDSbDtD'^EB 


751594 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


